A 

HOOSIER  AUTOBIOGRAPHY 


BY 
WILLIAM  DUDLEY  FOULKE,  LL.D. 

AUTHOR   OF    "MAYA,"   "LIFE    OF   O.    P.    MORTON,"    "PROTEAN    PAPERS,' 

"DOROTHY  DAY,"  "MASTERPIECES  OF  THE  MASTERS  OF  FICTION," 

"SOME  LOVE  SONGS  OF  PETRARCH,"  "LYRICS  OF  WAR  AND 

PEACE,"    "  FIGHTING  THE  SPOILSMEN,"    "TODAY 

AND  YESTERDAY,"  ETC. 


NEW    YORK 
OXFORD  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 

AMERICAN  BRANCH:  35  WEST  32o  STREET 
LONDON,  TORONTO,  MELBOURNE  &  BOMBAY 


Copyright,  1922, 
BY  OXFORD  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 

AMERICAN   BRANCH 


PRINTED  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA 


The  author  offers  his  grateful  acknowledgment  to  his 
friends  Professor  C.  K.  Chase  of  Hamilton  College,  New 
York,  and  to  Mrs.  Chase  for  their  careful  revision  and 
correction  of  the  manuscript  of  this  book  and  for  their 
many  valuable  suggestions. 

The  lines  at  the  beginning  of  each  chapter  are  taken 
from  two  volumes  of  verse  by  the  author,  "Lyrics  of 
War  and  Peace"  (Oxford  University  Press  and  Bobbs 
Merrill  Co.,  1916),  and  "Today  and  Yesterday'7  (Ox 
ford  University  Press,  1920). 


CONTENTS 

PAGB 

CHAPTER  I.    EARLY  LIFE I 

Introductory 

Boyhood 

Quaker  Influences 

Our  Summer  Home 

Preparing  for  College 

College  Life 

Law  School 

The  Liberal  Club 

Marriage 

Bloomfield 

Law  Practice  in  New  York    . 

Removal  to  Indiana 

CHAPTER  II.    LIFE  IN  INDIANA .       .      30 

The  Richmond  Home 
The  Charm  of  Indiana 
The  Art  Association 
Local  Colour 
A  Fox  Hunt 
The  Family 
Dramatic  Interests 
At  the  Indiana  Bar 
A  Scrimmage 
Railroad  Practice 
Personal  Associations 
Retirement  from  Practice 
Reflections 

CHAPTER  III.    INDIANA  ASSOCIATIONS,  JULIAN,  RttEY,  ETC.  .       .      55 
The  Tuesday -Club 
George  W.  Julian 
Mugwumps 
Indianapolis  Clubs 
Western  Association  of  Writers 
James  Whitcomb  Riley 
Indiana  Society  of  Chicago 
Jekyl  Island  Club 
Earlham  College 
Swarthmore  College 

CHAPTER  IV.    THE  STATE  SENATE  .      .      .      .      *     >      .     »      70 
The  Campaign 
The  Session  of  1883 
The  Session  of  1885 
Investigation  of  the  State  Treasury 
Toleration  toward  the  Negro 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

CHAPTER  V.    PUBLIC  QUESTIONS 84 

Woman's  Suffrage 

Civil  Service  Reform 

Proportional  Representation 

The  Russian  Question 

The  National  Municipal  League 

CHAPTER  VI.    POLITICAL  ACTIVITIES — IMPERIALISM     ....     100 
Early  Political  Affiliations 
The  Hayes  and  Garfield  Campaigns 
The  Three  Cleveland  Campaigns 
Anti-Imperialism 
The  Campaign  of  1900 

CHAPTER  VII.    LIFE  IN  WASHINGTON 109 

Theodore  Roosevelt 

Rides  and  Walks  with  the  President 

Other  Personal  Incidents 

Roosevelt  Characteristics 

Other  Washington  Associations 

The  Muskogee  Investigation 

CHAPTER  VIII.    ROOSEVELT  AND  TAFT  CAMPAIGNS     ....     143 
The  Roosevelt  Campaign,  1904 
The   Taft  Campaign,   1908 

CHAPTER  IX.    THE  PROGRESSIVE  MOVEMENT 151 

The  Taft  Administration 

The  Payne-Aldrich  Tariff  Bill 

Ballinger — Roosevelt's  Return 

The  Republican  Nomination  in  1912 

The  Progressive  Convention  and  Campaign 

The  First  Wilson  Administration 

The  Campaign  of  1916 

CHAPTER  X.    THE  TRUSTS 170 

The  Chicago  Conferences 
Trusts  in  the  Campaign  of  1908 
Practical  Remedies 

CHAPTER  XL    THE  LEAGUE  TO  ENFORCE  PEACE 179 

Preliminary  Organisations 
The  League  to  Enforce  Peace 
The  League  of  Nations 

CHAPTER  XII.    THE  WORLD  WAR 190 

Outbreak  of  the  Struggle 

Preparedness 

The  Conscription  Board 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

CHAPTER  XIII.    JOURNALISM  AND  LITERATURE    .      .....       .    204 

Journalism 

Literary  Interests 

"Life  of  Governor  Morton" 

"Maya" 

"Protean  Papers" 

"History  of  the  Langobards" 

"Dorothy  Day" 

"Masterpieces  of  the  Masters  of  Fiction" 

"Fighting  the  Spoilsmen" 

Poetry 

CHAPTER  XIV.    PERSONALIA 213 

Whims  and  Fancies 

Some  Business  Experiences 

The  Society  of  Friends 

Retrospect 

Philosophy  of  Life 

APPENDIX  I.  INDIANA'S  OUTPUT.  SPEECH  BEFORE  THE  INDIANA 
SOCIETY  OF  CHICAGO,  JANUARY  28,  1908 227 

APPENDIX  II.  ADDRESS  AT  THE  OPENING  SESSION  OF  THE  NA 
TIONAL  AMERICAN  WOMAN  SUFFRAGE  ASSOCIATION  IN  WASH 
INGTON,  D.  C,  FEBRUARY  18,  1890 ,  .  233 


A  Hoosier  Autobiography 


CHAPTER  I 
EARLY  LIFE 

I  GLEAN  with  care  the  stalks  that  memory  leaves 
Upon  the  time-mown  fields  of  earlier  years; 

I  gather  all  and  bind  them  into  sheaves, 
Then  winnow  them,  that  from  the  fruitful  ears 

Some  seed  may  fall  that  in  its  turn  will  bring 

Fresh  hope  of  harvest  for  a  coming  spring. 

— Autobiography.    . 

INTRODUCTORY 

Many  years  ago  I  dreamed  that  my  friend,  Captain  Y.,  believed 
he  was  going  to  die  upon  a  certain  day,  and  accordingly  fixed  the 
time  and  made  all  the  arrangements  for  his  funeral,  which  was 
to  be  held  in  the  Quaker  meeting  house  at  Richmond,  Indiana. 
When  the  day  arrived,  his  friends  assembled;  the  house  was  full, 
and  among  others  came  my  father,  a  minister  of  the  Society  of 
Friends,  to  bear  his  testimony  to  the  virtues  of  the  deceased.  But 
the  Captain's  presentiments  had  not  come  true,  he  was  still  liv 
ing,  and  he  now  determined  to  preside  in  person  over  his  own 
obsequies.  He  sat  "at  the  head  of  the  meeting"  and  as  my 
father,  accompanied  by  another  Friend,  walked  up  the  aisle,  he 
called  out  that  Abijah  Jones  was  welcome  but  that  he  did  not 
choose  to  have  Thomas  Foulke  speak  at  his  funeral.  While  it 
seemed  to  me  that  a  man  had  the  right  to  manage  his  own 
funeral  if  he  were  there  to  see  to  it  himself,  I  was  annoyed  at  the 
affront  to  my  father  and  we  walked  out  of  the  meeting-house 
together. 

In  writing  these  memoirs  I  cannot  help  thinking  of  that  old 

i 


V  LiM  . 


dream.  Biography,  ,  :tO:  be;  'qdm^ete,*  s&puld  be  a  post-mortem 
account  of  a  man's  fif  e  and  'therefore  written  by  another.  Is  not 
the  man  who  writes  his  own  biography  like  one  who  would  take 
charge  of  his  own  obsequies  and  thus  try  to  forestall  an  un 
palatable  obituary? 

Yet  the  man  himself  knows  better  than  another  what  he  has 
done  and  why,  and  if  he  be  honest,  he  should  be  able  to  give  a 
more  faithful  account  of  his  career.  The  main  questions  are, 
whether  the  story  is  worth  the  telling  and  how  well  it  can  be 
told.  I  cannot  say  that  there  is  anything  very  important  in 
the  pages  which  follow.  I  have  seen  a  good  deal  of  the  world 
from  various  sides  and  have  taken  part  in  a  good  many  public 
movements,  but  so  have  thousands  of  others;  and  my  best  hope 
to  justify  the  narrative  is  found  in  the  maxim  that  the  life  of  the 
humblest  man,  if  reasonably  well  told,  may  be  of  interest  to  the 
greatest. 

And  a  certain  value  may  also  lie  in  the  point  of  view.  It 
may  be  that  a  man,  originally  a  New  Yorker,  then  a  Hoosier  by 
adoption,  who  has  witnessed  the  significant  development  of  the 
great  Middle  West  during  half  a  century  and  who  has  himself 
been  connected,  in  their  early  stages,  with  many  movements  then 
considered  radical  but  since  adopted  by  the  country  at  large,  such 
as  Woman's  Suffrage,  Civil  Service  and  Municipal  Reform,  and 
the  development  of  closer  international  relations  —  it  can  well  be 
that  this  man  may,  in  the  story  of  his  life,  have  some  contribu 
tion  to  offer  to  the  history  of  his  own  time. 


BOYHOOD 


Many  New  Yorkers  have  been  born  and  reared  in  other  parts 
of  the  country  —  in  New  England,  in  the  South,  in  the  Missis 
sippi  Valley,  some  of  them  in  Indiana  —  why  then  should  not  a 
man  who  has  spent  the  bulk  of  his  life  in  Indiana  call  himself 
a  Hoosier,  though  he  be  a  native  of  the  city  of  New  York? 

I  was  born  in  that  city  on  November  20,  1848,  at  No.  76 
Rivington  Street.  It  was  a  neighbourhood  which  was  then  quiet 
and  respectable,  though  not  at  all  fashionable,  but  which  has 
since  become  part  of  the  tenement  house  district  of  the  metropolis. 


BOYHOOD  3 

My  father,  Thomas  Foulke,  was  at  the  time  principal  of  a 
ward  school,  then  the  largest  in  the  city,  with  an  attendance  of 
some  two  thousand  pupils.  He  was,  however,  a  man  of  some 
little  property  and  not  altogether  dependent  on  the  meagre  salary 
of  his  calling.  He  belonged  to  a  Pennsylvania  family  which  had 
settled  in  Gwynedd  Township,  Montgomery  County,  about  four 
teen  miles  from  Philadelphia,  over  two  hundred  years  ago.  Ed 
ward  and  Eleanor  Foulke,  the  original  founders  of  the  family  in 
America,  were  among  the  colonists  brought  over  by  William  Penn. 
Edward  belonged  to  an  old  Welsh  family,  which  traced  its  descent 
back  to  the  time  of  Henry  II,  and  some  of  whose  members  were 
well  known  to  English  history. 

He  was  a  farmer  and  became  a  Quaker  about  the  time  of  his 
emigration.  His  descendants  for  several  generations  nearly  all 
belonged  to  the  Society  of  Friends,  and  my  father  and  grandfather 
were  both  ministers  of  that  Society. 

I  was  an  only  child.  My  mother,  Hannah  S.  Foulke,  was  the 
daughter  of  Abraham  Shoemaker,  a  New  York  merchant.  He  also 
was  a  Friend,  a  man  of  excellent  business  ability  but  very  much 
of  a  recluse,  seeing  few  people  and  visiting  not  at  all.  His  wife, 
Margaret  Shoemaker,  was  much  more  active  and  took  an  interest 
in  many  public  questions,  particularly  in  the  anti-slavery  move 
ment.  They  both  lived  to  be  over  ninety  years  of  age. 

My  parents  resided  with  them  and  with  a  brother  and  sister 
of  my  mother.  The  house  was  for  a  time  one  of  the  stations  on 
the  "under ground  railroad,"  for  we  used  to  help  fugitive  negroes 
on  their  way  to  Canada  and  we  were  once  involved  in  litigation 
on  account  of  assistance  thus  given. 

At  a  later  time  my  father  was  the  principal  of  Friends'  Semi 
nary,  an  academy  established  by  the  Society  in  a  building  adjoin 
ing  the  meeting-house  in  Rutherford  Place  in  New  York.  I 
attended  school  there  for  a  number  of  years  and  was  graduated 
in  I864.1 

1  The  incidents  of  my  early  life,  my  school  days  and  the  Quaker 
customs  and  traditions  which  they  illustrate,  are  more  fully  contained 
in  the  first  book  of  "Dorothy  Day"  (Cosmopolitan  Press,  1911,  pp.  I 
to  116),  the  statements  of  which  are  based  on  facts,  though  the  actual 
names  are  not  given. 


4  EARLY  LIFE 

QUAKER   INFLUENCES 

Born  and  reared  as  I  was  in  a  family  of  old-fashioned  Hicksite 
Quakers,  the  views  and  traditions  of  their  simple  and  earnest 
religion  became  part  of  my  life,  and  although  I  have  since  dis 
carded  most  of  these,  some  still  remain  with  me. 

The  Society  of  Friends  has  no  written  creed;  its  paramount 
doctrine  is  the  belief  in  the  "inner  light,"  the  conviction  that 
God  reveals  himself  directly  to  all  who  seek  His  guidance,  not 
only  upon  questions  of  dogma  and  of  moral  and  religious  duty, 
but  often  as  a  special  providence  guiding  and  protecting  the  lives 
of  His  followers.  The  supreme  injunction  of  George  Fox,  the 
founder  of  Quakerism,  was  "Mind  the  Light."  It  was  generally 
considered  that  the  ministers  of  the  Society  in  their  sermons 
uttered  not  simply  their  own  thoughts  but  a  message  which  had 
been  given  to  them  by  a  higher  power. 

Besides  this  fundamental  idea,  there  were  other  things  of  a 
more  practical  nature  to  which  the  Society  was  devoted,  and 
enquiries  respecting  these  things  were  made  periodically  in  their 
various  meetings  by  means  of  certain  formal  "Queries,"  asking, 
for  instance,  whether  Friends  were  careful  to  keep  their  obliga 
tions  and  not  extend  their  business  beyond  their  ability  to  man 
age  it;  whether  they  observed  temperance  and  sobriety  in  their 
lives,  etc.  The  principles  of  peace  and  non-resistance  and  a  deep 
regard  for  human  liberty,  involving  opposition  to  negro  slavery, 
were  also  among  the  unwritten  tenets  of  the  Society. 

We  used  to  entertain  at  our  house  many  of  the  Friends  who 
took  part  in  the  various  yearly  and  quarterly  meetings  which 
were  held  in  New  York.  So  numerous  were  our  guests  that, 
in  addition  to  those  we  could  accommodate  in  our  various  bed 
rooms,  the  attic  of  the  house  was  devoted  to  them,  cots  and 
improvised  beds  being  placed  there,  and  the  women's  quarters 
being  carefully  screened  off  by  curtains. 

The  broad  brims,  plain  bonnets,  and  drab  suits  were  there  in 
abundance.  My  father  himself  wore  the  peculiar  garb  of  the 
Quakers  with  high  collar  and  curving  front  lines  of  a  coat  that 
was  always  made  of  black  broadcloth;  his  silk  hat,  with  a  brim 
a  little  wider  than  the  prevailing  fashion  of  the  day,  was  glossy 


QUAKER  INFLUENCES  5 

and  well  brushed,  and  his  black  stock  looked  always  fresh  and 
new.  I  have  sometimes  wondered  whether  there  was  not  almost 
as  much  pride  of  appearance  shown  in  this  garb  as  in  the  cos 
tumes  of  the  "world's  people." 

The  eminent  ministers  of  the  Society,  Lucretia  Mott,  John 
Hunt,  David  Barnes,  Richard  Cromwell,  and  others,  were  often 
with  us,  and  my  youth  was  spent  in  an  atmosphere  of  mysticism 
and  deep  religious  faith.  There  were  wonderful  stories  of  divine 
revelations  given  to  these  servants  of  the  Lord,  and  we  were 
impressed  with  the  supreme  importance  of  heeding  the  "inner 
light"  which,  it  was  believed,  shone  upon  the  faithful  in  their 
daily  lives. 

Among  the  ministers  who  were  with  us  at  Yearly  Meetings 
and  on  other  occasions  was  my  grandfather,  Joseph  Foulke,  a 
hale  and  genial  old  man  with  a  round,  moon-like  face,  his  drab 
waistcoat  covering  an  ample  "bay-window."  He  was  always  a 
welcome  guest  at  the  houses  of  Friends,  who  entertained  him  when 
he  travelled  from  place  to  place,  as  he  often  did,  in  the  work  of 
the  ministry.  The  Quaker  preachers  received  nothing  for  their 
services,  they  even  paid  their  own  expenses,  and  my  grandfather, 
when  he  deeded  his  farm  to  his  eldest  son,  reserved  a  small  annuity 
which  enabled  him  to  do  this  gratuitous  service  and  to  deliver  such 
messages  as  he  believed  had  been  entrusted  to  him  by  his  Divine 
Master. 

He  had  a  great  assortment  of  charming  anecdotes,  generally 
about  Friends  and  their  odd  ways  and  sayings,  which  always  drew 
around  him  a  circle  of  interested  listeners. 

His  childlike  faith  stayed  with  him  up  to  his  final  hour,  and 
amid  the  sufferings  of  his  last  illness  he  was  filled  with  the  calm 
assurance  that  he  had  fought  the  good  fight,  that  he  had  kept  the 
faith,  and  that  there  was  laid  up  for  him  the  crown  of  righteous 
ness  which  the  Lord,  the  righteous  judge,  would  give  to  those  who 
served  Him. 

But  in  spite  of  these  early  surroundings  I  became  distrustful, 
even  in  boyhood,  of  the  supernatural  agencies  of  which  I  heard 
so  much.  Sometimes,  led  by  some  shining  example  which  had 
been  set  before  me,  I  would  open  the  Bible  at  random  with  the 
hope  that  the  "inner  light"  would  shine  for  my  instruction  from 


6  EARLY  LIFE 

some  particular  passage,  but  I  commonly  came  upon  a  verse  tell 
ing  me  that  Shaharaim  begat  children  in  the  country  of  Moab, 
or  describing  the  preparation  of  the  shew  bread;  or  if,  relying 
upon  the  intimations  of  the  "inner  light,"  I  took  the  second  omni 
bus  in  place  of  the  first  one,  I  never  could  find  that  any  accident 
happened  to  either  of  them,  until  at  last  I  came  to  believe  that 
my  own  common  sense  was  a  safer  guide  for  daily  conduct  than  any 
other  kind  of  illumination. 

Although  these  notions  of  spiritual  interposition  gradually  grew 
faint  and  finally  disappeared,  yet  the  habit  of  following  personal 
convictions  of  duty  became  deeply  imbedded  in  my  nature.  Such 
convictions,  however,  were  not  always  well  balanced;  they  were 
much  stronger  in  regard  to  some  things  than  to  others  just  as 
important.  Where  they  were  strong,  I  instinctively  and  inevita 
bly  followed  them;  when  this  was  not  the  case  I  often  fell  short 
in  my  conduct. 

About  the  time  of  the  close  of  the  Civil  War,  we  moved  from 
the  house  in  Rivington  Street  to  one  in  Thirty-eighth  Street 
between  Fifth  and  Sixth  avenues,  then  very  far  "up-town." 

OUR   SUMMER   HOME 

Our  summers  were  usually  spent  at  Long  Branch,  where  my 
aunt,  Ann  S.  Dudley,  had  a  cottage.  The  rest  of  the  family  lived 
with  her  during  the  hot  months  for  nearly  a  score  of  years.  Long 
Branch  was  quite  a  primitive  place  in  those  days.  There  were  no 
railroads,  and  only  a  single  steamboat  running  from  New  York. 
It  left  at  a  different  hour  each  day  so  as  to  sail  up  the  shallow 
waters  of  the  Shrewsbury  inlet  at  high  tide.  It  often  ran  aground 
and  we  sometimes  remained  fast  for  hours;  on  one  occasion,  all 
night  long. 

The  place  was  then  a  quiet,  rural  neighbourhood  with  a  few 
summer  hotels  stretched  along  the  low  bluff  by  the  shore.  Our 
cottage  was  about  a  mile  back  from  the  sea.  It  stood  upon  the 
side  of  a  small  hill  that  rose  like  an  ocean  swell  from  out  the 
plain.  The  hill  was  crowned  by  our  summer-house,  from  which 
there  was  a  remarkably  fine  view  not  only  of  the  sea  but  of  the 
distant  Highlands  of  Navesink.  Nearer  were  the  hills  of  Rumson 


OUR  SUMMER  HOME  7 

Neck  and  Red  Bank,  with  woods,  fields  and  farmhouses  in  the 
foreground.  Among  these  the  Shrewsbury  inlet  wound  its  glis 
tening,  snake-like  course,  and  one  branch  of  it  came  almost  up 
to  the  foot  of  our  hill,  where  it  disappeared  among  the  tall  green 
rushes.  I  had  a  little  attic  room  where  I  studied  and  wrote, 
though  my  life  was  mostly  out  of  doors,  and  I  recall  with  delight 
the  bathing,  the  sailing,  the  fishing,  the  picnic  in  the  woods,  the 
clambake  by  the  river,  the  dance  at  night  in  the  hotel,  the 
tete-a-tete  upon  the  beach.  I  loved  especially  the  cool  evenings 
of  the  early  autumn,  and  always  returned  to  the  city  with  regret. 
There  is  one  figure  that  stands  out  very  clearly  in  my  memory 
of  those  days  at  Long  Branch.  It  is  that  of  the  venerable  Bishop 
Simpson  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  who  was,  I  think, 
next  to  Henry  Ward  Beecher,  the  most  eloquent  pulpit  orator  in 
America.  He  lived  for  two  or  three  summers  in  a  little  cottage 
just  at  the  end  of  our  lane  on  the  opposite  side  of  the  highroad. 
Here  I  visited  him  occasionally  and  was  much  impressed  with  his 
benignant  personality.  For  a  few  years  President  Grant  had  a 
summer  cottage  on  the  beach;  he  was  expected  one  Sunday  at 
the  village  church,  but  did  not  come.  Possibly  in  anticipation 
of  his  presence,  Bishop  Simpson  had  prepared  a  sermon  which 
seemed  to  me,  as  I  listened  to  it,  the  most  impressive  I  had  ever 
heard.  It  was  apparently  extemporaneous,  but  had  evidently  been 
carefully  planned  beforehand.  The  text  was,  "Abel,  being  dead, 
yet  speaketh."  The  bishop  passed  in  brief  but  eloquent  review 
the  great  events  in  the  history  of  the  world  since  Abel's  day — the 
changes  wrought  by  time,  war,  civilisation,  and  religion  in  all  the 
races  of  men.  "And  yet,"  he  said,  "the  voice  which  spoke  in 
those  primaeval  days  is  speaking  still  and  will  continue  to  speak 
until  the  latest  generation."  This  was  the  great  preacher's  illus 
tration  of  the  power  of  human  influence.  He  compared  it  to  a 
pebble  dropped  in  the  still  waters  of  a  pool,  whose  widening  circles 
spread  on  every  side  until  they  kissed  the  shores.  He  reminded 
us  of  the  principle  of  physics  that  no  force,  wherever  exerted,  is 
entirely  lost,  and  he  drew  from  this  theme  the  inevitable  moral 
that  each  man  in  every  act  of  his  life  should  so  conduct  himself 
that  his  influence  would  work  for  the  glory  of  God  and  the 
welfare  of  mankind. 


8  EARLY  LIFE 

He  spoke  also  of  the  "cloud  of  witnesses"  by  whom  our  acts 
were  seen,  picturing  in  fancy  the  clouds  that  developed  themselves 
into  cherub  faces,  as  in  Raphael's  paintings  of  the  Madonna.  His 
sermon  was  a  poem,  and  he  held  us  for  an  hour  and  a  half  captive 
to  the  spell  of  his  oratory. 

PREPARING  FOR   COLLEGE 

During  the  winter  and  spring  of  1865  I  had  to  prepare 
for  college,  for  it  was  decided  to  send  me  to  Columbia  in  the 
fall.  I  knew  little  Latin  and  not  a  word  of  Greek,  and  a 
formidable  task  was  before  me  to  be  completed  between  No 
vember  and  June.  I  secured  as  tutor  a  thorough  drill-master 
in  Greek  verbs  and  in  the  rules  of  syntax,  and  after  I  had  .got 
into  the  swing  of  it  I  was  able  to  take  a  hundred  and  fifty  lines 
of  Homer  at  a  lesson,  and  by  June  I  had  gone  over  the  whole 
ground  required.  I  was  greatly  flustered,  however,  in  the  exami 
nation  by  the  awe-inspiring  presence  of  Prof.  Charles  Anthon, 
and  made  a  flat  failure  in  Plutarch  and  the  Anabasis.  But  when 
he  called  for  Homer,  there  was  something  in  the  rhythm  of  the 
hexameters  that  ended  my  confusion.  I  knew  them  so  well  that 
I  couldn't  get  them  wrong,  and  after  I  had  answered  all  his 
questions  correctly,  he  wrote  "Passed"  upon  my  card,  with  the 
remark,  "You  may  thank  old  Homer  for  that.  He  saved  you." 

COLLEGE  LIFE 

Columbia  College  at  that  time  was  in  temporary  quarters.  It 
had  moved  from  its  former  home  in  College  Place  and  was  oc 
cupying  an  old  building  on  Forty-ninth  Street  that  had  formerly 
been  used  for  a  Blind  Asylum.  The  campus  in  front  was  large 
enough  for  a  "rush"  between  Freshmen  and  Sophomores,  and  a 
little  later  we  had  the  vacant  square  between  Forty-ninth  and 
Fiftieth  streets  and  between  Fifth  and  Sixth  avenues  for  our 
games  of  baseball  and  football.  Much  of  the  adjacent  neigh 
bourhood  was  occupied  by  squatters  with  their  shanties  perched 
upon  the  rocks,  a  very  convenient  thing  for  us  boys  when  we 
wanted  to  buy  hens  or  geese  to  throw  into  the  lecture  rooms 
during  examinations. 


COLLEGE  LIFE  9 

The  curriculum  was  not  like  the  present  one  with  its  many 
optional  courses.  We  all  had  to  fit  into  the  same  bed.  The 
classics,  history,  literature,  logic,  mathematics  and  some  rather 
rudimentary  work  in  chemistry,  physics,  etc.,  constituted,  with 
"The  Evidences  of  the  Christian  Religion,"  the  principal  branches 
of  instruction.  The  president  was  Dr.  F.  A.  P.  Barnard,  a 
kindly,  broad-minded  old  man,  who  was  at  that  time  laying  the 
foundation  for  a  fuller  recognition  of  the  sciences.  Dr.  Anthon 
was  professor  of  Greek;  he  was  a  noble-looking  man — a  prince 
of  old-fashioned  pedagogues — with  his  jokes,  his  tyrannies, 
his  prejudices  and  partialities,  and  with  them  a  bonhommie  so 
strong  and  winning  that  we  were  devoted  to  him.  To  me  at  least 
he  gave  an  inspiration  and  a  love  for  the  Greek  language  and 
literature  which  have  lasted  through  life.  Say  what  you  will  about 
the  uselessness  of  Greek  in  general  education,  I  would  rather  lose 
all  the  rest  of  what  I  learned  in  college  than  my  rich  experience 
of  this  one  language.  The  memory  of  Dr.  Anthon's  classes  is  an 
enduring  delight. 

Another  stimulating  instructor  was  Professor  Peck,  the  head 
of  the  department  of  mathematics.  He  was  a  short,  stout  man, 
with  keen,  incisive  voice,  awkward — sometimes  tumbling  headlong 
over  the  globes  and  other  furniture  of  his  lecture  room;  but  he 
had  wonderful  powers  of  inspiration  in  a  branch  of  learning  which 
is  not  likely  to  arouse  enthusiasm.  He  once  became  very  elo 
quent  in  a  demonstration  upon  mathematical  grounds  of  the 
inevitable  evolution  of  the  solar  system  from  a  large  body  of 
gaseous  matter  distributed  irregularly  through  space.  He  too  was 
one  of  the  men  we  loved,  and  this  in  spite  of  his  irascibility. 
There  was  a  tradition  that  he  had  once  challenged  to  personal 
combat,  then  and  there,  a  student  whom  he  had  detected  in  some 
dishonourable  act.  He  used  to  denounce  the  pranks  we  tried 
to  play  upon  him  for  their  lack  of  originality.  We  might  make 
him  the  object,  he  said,  of  any  practical  joke  we  liked,  if  it  were 
really  new  and  good,  but  to  witness  our  stale  and  stupid  per 
formances  year  after  year  wearied  his  soul.  We  respected  this 
view  of  the  matter,  and  as  no  one  could  invent  anything  new, 
we  left  him  in  peace. 

Another  favourite  of  ours  was  Dr.  Schmidt,  professor  of  Greek 


io  EARLY  LIFE 

and  Roman  antiquities.  He  was  a  thin,  prim,  precise  old  man, 
but  with  a  delicious  sense  of  humour.  Once  he  fell  upon  us  sud 
denly  while  we  were  chucking  some  geese  up  a  flight  of  steps 
leading  to  Professor's  Nairne's  room.  "O  gentlemen,"  he  said, 
"please  desist!  Your  labours  are  unnecessary.  There  are  quite 
enough  of  these  here  now!" 

The  college  statutes  seemed  almost  as  long  as  the  Mosaic  law 
and  stood  before  us  as  a  constant  temptation  to  break  their  com 
mandments.  Punishments  were  prescribed  with  mathematical 
precision.  Three  admonitions  made  one  warning,  and  after  three 
warnings  the  culprit  had  to  go. 

I  was  involved  quite  early  in  the  toils  of  this  rigid  code.  I 
had  been  in  college  only  two  weeks,  when,  in  the  geometry  class, 
I  found  a  fellow-student  in  some  trouble  over  a  proposition  in 
Euclid  and  tried  to  help  him  out.  We  were  caught.  It  was  Fri 
day  afternoon  about  half-past  twelve.  "You  will  appear  before 
the  faculty  at  one,"  said  Professor  Van  Amringe.  We  trembled 
and  were  silent.  At  the  appointed  hour  we  waited  around  the 
President's  door  as  men  might  await  trial  before  inquisitors. 
Suddenly  we  were  ushered  into  the  awful  presence.  The  pro 
fessors  were  seated  in  a  semicircle  with  President  Barnard  in 
the  middle  and  Van  Amringe,  the  secretary,  at  a  table  by  his 
side,  while  the  two  wings,  with  Anthon,  Drisler,  Joy,  Nairne, 
Rood,  and  the  rest,  stretched  around  us  as  if  to  enclose  us  in 
their  fatal  clasp.  We  were  made  to  stand  up  in  the  middle  of 
this  semicircle.  Van  Amringe  had  written  out  the  charge,  and  it 
was  read  to  us  with  great  solemnity.  What  had  we  to  say? 
There  wasn't  anything  to  say.  A  confession  of  guilt  was  our 
only  refuge,  and  we  were  told  to  retire  while  the  faculty  delib 
erated  upon  our  doom.  We  went  out  and  stayed  around  the 
door  for  ten  minutes.  We  were  told  to  re-enter  and  were  in 
formed  that  an  admonition  would  be  inflicted  upon  us  and  that 
we  must  return  in  one  week  from  that  day  to  have  it  adminis 
tered.  So  a  week  later  back  we  came,  but  during  this  time  we 
had  become  greatly  hardened.  The  admonition  did  not  seem 
nearly  so  terrible  as  in  those  first  awful  moments.  The  good 
Dr.  Barnard  delivered  it  to  us  quite  mildly,  considering,  no 


COLLEGE  LIFE  n 

doubt,  our  youth  and  inexperience,  for  he  told  us  that  the  offence 
we  had  committed,  although  great,  was  not  the  most  unpardon 
able  in  the  category  of  college  misdemeanours.  What  we  after 
wards  saw  convinced  us  that  this  was  true.  The  admonition  was 
long,  eloquent  and  edifying,  and  if  we  were  not  the  better  for  it, 
the  fault  was  ours. 

This  was  the  only  time  I  was  ever  "caught"  at  anything — not 
that  there  were  no  other  offences  far  worse  than  this  trifling 
dereliction.  There  were  pranks  quite  too  numerous  to  record 
here,  but  after  this  first  experience  I  became  wiser  in  covering 
up  my  tracks  and  was  indeed  soon  considered  by  the  faculty  one 
of  the  model  students,  a  reputation  I  little  deserved.  I  have 
never  had  any  remorse,  however,  for  these  escapades,  and  I  look 
on  them  even  to-day  with  more  satisfaction  in  their  success  than 
shame  at  their  depravity.  Some  of  the  other  students  were  not  so 
lucky.  Conkling,  for  example,  a  fellow  with  a  long,  solemn  face, 
was  always  caught  and  got  warnings  and  all  sorts  of  things  for 
the  most  trifling  offences. 

In  the  various  classrooms  I  sat  next  to  Hamilton  Fish,  Jr. 
This  was  not  on  account  of  any  particular  affinity  we  had  for  each 
other,  but  because  Fish  and  Foulke  both  began  with  F.  On  my 
other  side  was  Montague  Geer,  afterwards  rector  of  St.  Paul's 
in  New  York.  Fish  was  the  son  of  the  distinguished  Secretary 
of  State  under  Grant.  During  our  first  year  he  used  to  be  called 
"  Fresh  Fish"  by  the  upper  classmen  to  distinguish  him  from  his 
brother  Nicholas,  then  a  Junior.  Fish  was  by  nature  a  politician. 
He  was  the  leading  spirit  among  the  Delta  Psi's  in  our  class. 
This  fraternity  had  secured  a  large  number  of  members  and  was 
proceeding  to  appropriate  entirely  too  many  of  the  offices,  as  the 
rest  of  us  thought.  So  the  members  of  the  Delta  Phi  (to  which 
I  belonged),  together  with  those  of  the  Psi  Upsilon,  made  up  a 
slate  for  the  next  four  years,  distributing  the  class  presidencies, 
orations,  Goodwood  cup,  etc.  We  allotted  a  number  of  places, 
not  unreasonably  large,  to  those  who  didn't  belong  to  any  of  the 
fraternities.  Then  we  went  to  these  neutrals  and  told  them  of 
the  iniquity  of  the  Delta  Psi's  in  appropriating  so  many  positions, 
and  at  first  we  got  their  support,  but  somehow  this  plan  of  ours 


12  EARLY  LIFE 

leaked  out  and  they  became  lukewarm.  I  was  candidate  for  the 
class  presidency  in  the  Sophomore  year,  but  was  defeated  by  a 
majority  of  one,  after  a  campaign  as  intense  as  if  the  fate  of 
the  world  depended  on  it.  I  never  had  good  luck  in  winning 
elections,  but,  notwithstanding  this,  at  the  end  of  the  four  years 
I  had  filled  as  many  offices  and  delivered  as  many  "orations"  as 
any  other  man  in  the  class.  A  New  York  newspaper  remarked 
of  one  of  these  speeches  that  it  represented  the  "usual  fervid 
style  of  college  eloquence."  To  judge  from  a  sample  which  I 
now  blush  to  read,  the  description  was  accurate.  But  the  style 
was  popular  then.  After  my  class-day  "oration"  my  companions 
tried  to  lift  me  on  their  shoulders  and  carry  me  around  in 
triumph.  I  have  always  been  sorry  I  didn't  let  them  do  it.  In 
my  Junior  year  I  presided  at  a  memorable  "impeachment"  trial 
held  from  day  to  day,  in  which  some  of  my  colleagues  in  the 
Delta  Phi  were  convicted,  with  others,  of  issuing  an  unauthorised 
Columbiad,  or  College  annual,  and  the  impartiality  of  my  rul 
ings  was  questioned  (with  perfect  justice)  by  the  men  on  the 
other  side.  After  conviction,  however,  the  culprits  were  all  "par 
doned"  and  restored  to  membership. 

At  the  end  of  the  Freshman  year  I  found  myself  at  the  head 
of  the  class,  a  place  I  retained  during  the  three  remaining  years, 
taking  by  virtue  of  this  rank  the  right  to  deliver  the  Greek  saluta 
tory  poem  at  Commencement.  There  were  some  inconveniences 
attached  to  this  position;  for  instance,  I  had  to  keep  the  attend 
ance  roll  at  chapel,  and  I  sat  in  a  special  chair  in  front  of  the 
chancel  to  be  seen  of  all  the  faculty  and  with  no  chance  furtively 
to  prepare  for  the  next  recitation.  The  Greek  salutatory  too  was 
a  nuisance.  There  was  no  opportunity  to  distinguish  one's  self 
in  a  language  that  nobody  could  understand,  and  after  working 
for  weeks  over  reluctant  hexameters  it  was  not  flattering  to  have 
Dr.  Drisler  rewrite  nearly  the  whole  thing. 

I  also  won  a  number  of  prizes — a  Greek  prize  of  three  hundred 
dollars,  for  instance,  for  the  best  examination  on  ^schylus7 
Agamemnon.  A  number  of  my  classmates  offered  to  bet  me  two 
to  one  that  I  would  win  it.  I  was  not  so  certain,  and  I  "hedged" 
by  betting  a  hundred  dollars  that  I  would  not,  so  that  in  any 
event  I  was  sure  of  two  hundred.  This  money  I  soon  spent  in 


LAW  SCHOOL  13 

two  weeks  of  delight  with  some  boon  companions  in  the  White 
Mountains. 

In  the  Philolexian  (our  principal  literary  society)  George  L. 
Rives  (afterwards  Assistant  Secretary  of  State  under  Cleveland) 
and  I  once  contended  for  first  and  second  prizes  when  there  were 
no  other  competitors.  We  agreed  beforehand  to  divide  the 
money  whichever  way  the  thing  went  and  then  paid  no  further 
attention  to  the  matter. 

During  these  four  years  of  college  life  I  became  a  good  deal  of 
a  scamp,  and  had  it  not  been  for  a  foundation  of  better  princi 
ples  which  sometimes  asserted  themselves  in  later  life,  I  might 
well  have  fallen  permanently  into  evil  ways.  It  is  not  wise  to 
trust  a  boy  with  a  night  key  and  with  all  the  money  he  wants 
and  then  hope  that  he  will  turn  out  safe  and  sound. 

LAW  SCHOOL 

I  had  determined  to  follow  the  profession  of  the  law,  largely  on 
account  of  the  opportunities  it  might  offer  for  a  public  career, 
and  after  graduation  in  1869  I  went  to  the  Columbia  Law  School, 
which  was  then  in  Lafayette  Place,  nearly  opposite  the  old  Astor 
Library. 

There  was  a  striking  difference  between  our  conduct  at  the 
Law  School  and  our  behaviour  while  we  were  still  undergraduates. 
The  college  statutes  had  offered  us  a  constant  challenge,  and  we 
considered  it  a  sort  of  moral  duty  to  break  them.  But  when  we 
got  to  the  Law  School  there  were  no  statutes  to  violate;  we  were 
free  to  do  as  we  liked.  We  might  come  as  we  pleased,  go  as  we 
pleased,  attend  lectures  or  not  as  we  pleased;  the  result  was  that 
we  chose  to  attend  them  regularly  and  to  behave  ourselves. 
There  was  no  play  here,  it  was  all  earnest  work,  and  if  we  did 
not  do  it  properly  the  consequences  would  fall  wholly  upon  our 
selves.  Dr.  Theodore  Dwight,  who  was  at  the  head  of  the  Law 
School,  was  a  prince  of  instructors.  He  unfolded  to  us  so  simply, 
though  clearly,  the  principles  of 

"The  lawless  science  of  our  law, 
That  codeless  myriad  of  precedent, 
That  wilderness  of  single  instances," 


14  EARLY  LIFE 

that  it  became  in  our  eyes  not  a  mere  chaotic  mass  of  decisions, 
but  an  orderly  and  symmetrical  science.  Whatever  may  be  the 
advantages  of  the  present  "case  system"  in  the  study  of  juris 
prudence,  I  cannot  doubt  that  a  systematic  introduction  to  the 
general  principles  of  the  law  ought  to  precede  the  discussion  of 
individual  cases. 

We  were  all  fond  of  Professor  Dwight.  He  was  not  only  our 
instructor,  but  our  ideal  and  our  mentor,  to  whom  we  applied 
for  advice  and  counsel  and  upon  whose  friendship  we  could  always 
rely.  But,  alas!  one  thing  will  always  come  to  my  memory 
whenever  I  think  of  him:  the  beautiful  set  of  false  teeth  which 
used  to  "wabble"  as  he  lectured! 

I  also  attended  an  evening  course  of  lectures  on  constitutional 
law  by  Dr.  Francis  Lieber,  and  I  remember  well  the  impressive 
distinction  he  made  between  English  and  American  fundamental 
law.  The  English  had  what  he  called  a  "crescive  constitution," 
like  a  living  organism,  conforming  to  its  environment  in  the  same 
way  that  the  English  Common  Law  had  developed,  whereas  the 
American  Constitution  was  fixed  and  embodied  in  a  single  un 
changeable  instrument.  He  did  not  then  foresee  how  flexible 
that  document  was  soon  to  become.  He  had  a  very  comprehen 
sive  mind  and  was  quite  too  discursive  for  the  limits  of  the 
hour  devoted  to  each  lecture.  He  began  with  an  elaborate  in 
troduction  and  developed  his  initial  propositions  so  exhaustively 
that  before  he  got  fairly  into  the  theme  the  hour  was  up  and  he 
had  to  prance  over  the  main  branches  of  his  subject  with  great 
speed  and  to  very  little  effect. 

I  desired  to  become  a  member  of  the  bar  before  graduation, 
and  therefore  in  the  early  summer  of  1870  I  presented  myself 
for  examination  with  many  other  applicants  before  a  committee 
appointed  by  the  Supreme  Court  and  I  was  admitted. 

An  amusing  thing  happened  at  this  examination.  One  of  the 
candidates,  when  asked  to  define  a  court,  attempted  to  give  Black- 
stone's  definition,  "A  place  wherein  justice  is  judicially  adminis 
tered,"  but  got  it  mixed  and  answered,  "A  place  where  injustice 
is  judiciously  administered."  Perhaps  his  definition  was  almost 
as  accurate  as  the  other  one. 


THE  LIBERAL  CLUB  15 

THE   LIBERAL   CLUB 

While  I  was  at  the  Law  School,  and  for  some  time  afterwards, 
I  was  a  member  of  the  Liberal  Club.  We  held  weekly  meetings 
in  a  hall  near  the  Cooper  Union  building.  When  I  joined  the 
club  Mr.  Moran  (who  had  been  at  the  head  of  the  Erie  Railroad) 
was  its  president.  He  was  followed  by  Horace  Greeley,  and  he 
in  turn  by  James  Parton,  the  biographer.  While  there  were  many 
bright  men  and  a  few  eminent  men  among  the  members,  there 
were  also  a  number  of  queer  fish,  and  it  was  on  the  whole  a 
rather  indiscriminate  lot,  containing  many  extreme  radicals.  A 
paper  was  read  at  each  meeting,  followed  by  a  discussion  which 
was  very  animated,  often  witty,  and  sometimes  quite  personal. 
Nearly  every  man  had  his  particular  hobby.  One  was  continu 
ally  insisting  upon  "enlightened  self-interest"  as  the  most  powerful 
incentive  of  human  progress,  another  was  strong  on  "altruism." 
Mr.  Moran  and  Mr.  Henry  Demarest  Lloyd  were  radical  free 
traders;  Horace  Greeley  was  perhaps  the  leading  protectionist 
in  the  country.  At  one  meeting  Mr.  Greeley  gave  us  a  paper  on 
the  subject,  and  Mr.  Lloyd  criticised  it,  insisting  that  the  laws 
of  supply  and  demand  furnished  a  much  safer  standard  for  prices 
than  the  determination  of  a  few  hundred  "idiots"  in  Washington. 
In  reply  Mr.  Greeley  in  his  sleepy,  drawling,  benevolent  manner 
said:  "The  young  man  thinks  it  would  be  better  to  have  the  value 
of  a  commodity  determined  by  supply  and  demand  rather  than  by 
a  few  hundred  idiots  (I  think  the  young  man  called  them)  in 
Congress.  Now  I  want  the  young  man  to  remember  that  one  of 
the  first  of  these  idiots  was  George  Washington,  and  then  we  come 
down  to  such  other  idiots  as  Henry  Clay  and  Daniel  Webster — 
why,  I  once  heard  Daniel  Webster  make  a  speech  on  the  subject, 
and  he  spoke  almost  as  well  as  the  young  man  did  (the  young 
man  made  a  very  good  speech),"  etc. 

While  Mr.  Greeley  was  presiding,  messengers  from  the  Tribune 
would  come  with  proofs  of  editorials  which  he  had  written 
for  the  next  morning's  issue,  and  he  corrected  them  while  still 
in  the  chair.  He  was  much  troubled  with  insomnia  at  night, 
and  on  the  other  hand  he  used  to  fall  asleep  continually  in  the 
daytime.  He  would  frequently  fall  fast  asleep  in  his  chair  when 


16  EARLY  LIFE 

presiding  at  our  meetings,  with  his  head  thrown  back  and  his 
mouth  wide  open,  giving  us  the  amplest  opportunity  to  look  down 
his  throat.  While  he  was  really  a  very  eminent  man,  he  was 
grotesque.  He  used  to  ride  in  Central  Park  nearly  every  morn 
ing.  Here  I  often  passed  him,  his  feet  dangling,  his  trousers  half 
way  up  to  his  knees,  his  body  bouncing  up  and  down  on  his 
horse,  his  arms  flapping,  and  his  mind  evidently  very  far  away. 

Some  of  the  papers  read  before  the  club  were  extraordinary, 
and  the  ideas  expressed  in  debate  still  more  so.  Dr.  Lambert,  for 
instance,  had  a  notion  that  since  the  brain  consisted  of  two  prin 
cipal  parts,  one  on  the  right  side  and  one  on  the  left,  the  proper 
way  to  economise  in  intellectual  effort  was  to  use  alternately  first 
the  left  and  then  the  right  part,  letting  the  other  rest  meanwhile. 
Thus  a  man  could  keep  constantly  at  work.  He  also  had  great 
faith  in  what  he  called  "brainial"  food  for  the  nourishment  of  the 
intellect.  He  once  invited  the  club  to  a  luncheon  at  Jones' 
restaurant.  The  bill  of  fare  consisted  wholly  of  fish,  oysters,  lob 
sters,  and  other  similar  dishes  which  would  make  us  all  mental 
giants  if  we  stuck  to  the  diet  he  prescribed.  For  a  time  I  got  a 
good  deal  of  amusement  out  of  the  Liberal  Club,  though  not  much 
instruction,  but  after  my  marriage  my  wife  found  the  motley  gath 
ering  so  uncongenial  that  we  attended  but  seldom  and  at  last  gave 
it  up  altogether. 

While  I  was  at  the  Law  School  my  health  was  quite  poor.  I 
had  suffered  from  a  severe  attack  of  malarial  fever.  This  was 
followed  by  symptoms  of  pulmonary  tuberculosis  which  lasted 
some  two  years.  Dr.  Alonzo  Clark  was  my  physician.  His  pre 
scription  was  hard  to  follow  in  a  city  like  New  York :  "Never  less 
than  eight  hours  a  day  in  the  open  air."  But  I  undertook  the 
task.  I  rose  early,  had  a  horseback  ride  in  Central  Park,  and 
then  after  breakfast  walked  from  my  home  to  the  Law  School, 
a  mile  and  a  half.  After  lectures  I  walked  another  mile  to  the 
office  where  I  was  a  student,  then  rode  home  on  top  of  an  omnibus 
early  in  the  afternoon,  and  then  around  the  park  in  my  light 
wagon,  and  I  slept  close  to  an  open  window  at  night. 

The  following  summer  (1870)  I  went  with  my  father  across 
the  continent,  spending  some  time  among  the  Indians  in  Nebraska, 
visiting  California  and  Oregon  and  returning  by  way  of  Panama. 


MARRIAGE  17 

I  came  back  in  much  better  condition,  and  the  following  winter, 
under  a  course  of  treatment  similar  to  that  of  the  previous  year, 
the  symptoms  entirely  disappeared,  never  to  return. 


MARRIAGE 

My  visit  to  California  was  fraught  with  important  consequences. 
As  my  father  and  I  were  returning  from  the  South  Grove  of  Big 
Trees  back  to  Calaveras  we  met  another  wagon  going  to  the 
grove.  In  it  was  a  gentleman  who  introduced  himself  to  my 
father  as  Mark  E.  Reeves  of  Cincinnati.  With  him  were  his  wife, 
his  daughter,  and  his  son,  a  lad  of  perhaps  twelve  years.  I  par 
ticularly  noticed  the  daughter,  an  enthusiastic,  attractive  girl  of 
eighteen,  with  dark  brown  eyes.  They  were  going,  they  told  us, 
to  Yosemite.  That  was  also  our  destination,  and  two  days  later 
I  strolled  out  from  the  primitive  hostelry  of  Mr.  Hutchings  in 
the  valley  to  the  little  bridge  across  the  Merced  River  to  meet 
their  cavalcade  as  they  rode  up.  From  that  time  we  travelled 
together,  and  when  the  file  of  riders  wound  through  the  woods 
there  were  generally  two  who  lagged  behind  the  rest.  The  scenery 
was  superb,  the  air  exhilarating,  the  companionship  delightful. 
Our  party  remained  together  the  rest  of  the  summer,  going  to 
Portland  and  the  Columbia  River,  and  afterwards  to  Los  Angeles 
(which  was  then  a  village).  We  travelled  by  the  Holliday  line 
of  steamships,  for  there  was  hardly  a  railroad  in  that  part  of  the 
country. 

We  separated  late  in  the  summer,  my  father  and  I  to  return  by 
sea  via  Panama,  and  Mr.  Reeves  and  his  family  by  rail.  I  vis 
ited  them  at  their  residence  in  Richmond,  Indiana,  the  following 
winter  on  my  return  from  Nebraska,  whither  I  had  gone, 
charged  with  assisting  in  the  defence  of  five  Winnebago  Indians 
indicted  for  scalping  a  white  man.2  It  was  not  long  after  this 
that  our  engagement  was  announced.  The  following  summer  Mr. 
Reeves  and  his  family  sailed  for  Europe  and  were  gone  over  a 
year.  I  joined  them  in  Sweden  in  June  of  1872  at  a  little  town 
called  Lila  Edet  on  the  Gotha  Canal.  We  all  travelled  together 
during  the  summer,  and  the  marriage  took  place  in  Paris  at  the 

2  See  Protean  Papers,  p.  193. 


1 8  EARLY  LIFE 

American  Legation  on  the  loth  of  October.  We  had  our  wed 
ding  journey  in  Spain,  returning  to  America  early  in  the  winter, 
when  I  resumed  the  practice  of  the  law  in  which  I  was  by  this 
time  actively  engaged.  Looking  in  retrospect  upon  a  married  life 
of  fifty  years,  I  think  few  have  been  more  happy.  Six  children 
were  born  to  us.  Two  of  these,  a  little  boy  and  girl,  passed  away 
in  childhood.  Four  daughters  remain,  all  married  and  with  fam 
ilies.  I  cannot  recall  that  during  all  these  years  we  have  ever 
had  from  any  child  an  angry  or  reproachful  word  or  look. 


BLOOMFIELD 

It  was  not  long  after  our  return  from  Europe,  following  the 
wedding  journey,  that  we  went  to  live  at  Bloomfield,  New  Jersey. 
Here  we  resided  for  about  three  years,  the  expense  of  a  residence 
in  New  York  being  too  great  for  our  income.  We  kept  house  in 
quite  a  simple  way.  I  went  back  and  forth  to  my  law  office 
every  day  and  carried  a  basket  for  the  household  provisions  which 
I  bought  in  Washington  Market  on  my  way  home.  But  at  this 
time  I  was  engaged  in  a  long  case  before  a  referee:  the  case  of 
Dr.  Foote  against  the  Middletown  Insane  Asylum.  The  testimony 
taken  at  the  hearings  by  the  stenographer  became  so  voluminous 
that  it  would  fill  the  basket  and  sometimes  I  had  to  bring  this 
testimony  home  to  work  on  the  case  at  night.  On  such  occasions 
there  was  often  little  to  eat,  so  that  it  became  an  object  of  great 
interest  to  my  wife  and  the  cook,  when  the  basket  was  opened, 
to  see  whether  it  was  filled  with  chops  and  chickens  or  with  pa 
pers  in  the  Foote  case. 

Bloomfield  was  then  an  old-fashioned  New  Jersey  village  with 
an  ancient  stone  church  at  the  end  of  the  green  and  with  a  fringe 
of  newer  houses  on  the  outside.  There  were  frequent  robberies 
in  the  place  (which  was  only  an  hour's  distance  from  New  York) 
and  there  was  no  local  police.  We  had  a  burglar  alarm  in  our 
house,  and  Theodore,  our  coloured  servant,  had  an  antiquated 
pepper-box  pistol  which  he  used  for  the  defence  of  the  property. 
He  slept  in  an  attic  room  where  there  was  a  little  balcony.  When 
ever  the  burglar  alarm  sounded  he  would  seize  the  pepper-box, 
rush  out  to  the  balcony,  and  as  the  thief  ran  away  from  the  house 


LAW  PRACTICE  IN  NEW  YORK  19 

he  would  try  to  pepper  him  with  shot,  but  so  ineffectually  that 
after  a  while  the  burglars  did  not  even  take  the  trouble  to  run 
but  would  walk  off  leisurely  while  Theodore  banged  away  at  them 
in  vain. 

At  last  the  citizens  of  Bloomneld  had  to*  organise  their  own 
police,  and  we  took  turns  ourselves  in  patrolling  the  town.  We 
went  in  pairs,  and  our  turns  came  once  every  month.  We  never 
caught  anybody,  but  when  our  patrol  became  known  the  rob 
beries  diminished,  though  they  increased  in  neighbouring  towns. 
We  afterwards  found  that  the  burglars  had  a  house  in  the  next 
block  to  ours  which  they  had  packed  with  plunder  taken  from 
the  neighbourhood.  In  spite  of  the  poor  police  arrangements,  the 
Jersey  courts  were  good,  and  little  mercy  was  shown  to  the  delin 
quents  when  they  were  caught. 

LAW  PRACTICE  IN  NEW  YORK 

I  had  begun  the  practice  of  law  while  still  at  the  Law  School, 
as  a  clerk  in  the  office  of  Davies  and  Work,  one  of  the  leading 
firms  of  the  city,  in  which  Henry  E.  Davies,  formerly  Chief  Judge 
of  the  Court  of  Appeals,  was  of  counsel.  After  my  graduation  I 
had  formed  a  partnership  with  one  of  the  students  in  my  class, 
a  middle-aged  man,  Francis  Malocsay,  a  Hungarian  refugee.  We 
opened  offices  in  modest  rooms  at  the  corner  of  Broadway  and 
Liberty  streets. 

One  of  our  first  occupations  was  the  selection  of  an  office  boy. 
We  chose  him  by  a  very  imperfect  kind  of  natural  selection,  to 
wit,  merely  upon  his  looks.  We  had  advertised  in  one  of  the 
daily  papers,  and  when  we  came  down  in  the  morning  there  was 
a  long  line  of  boys  in  the  hall  and  on  the  staircase  all  the  way 
from  the  street.  It  was  an  aggregation  containing  much  physical 
deformity  and  mental  imbecility.  After  a  brief  enquiry  into  the 
respective  disqualifications  of  one  after  another  of  the  applicants, 
we  took  George  upon  the  strength  of  a  pair  of  bright  eyes,  a 
cheerful,  merry  voice,  and  intelligent,  handsome  features.  But 
we  soon  learned 

"There  is  no  art 
To  find  the  mind's  complexion  in  the  face.'* 


20  EARLY  LIFE 

George  was  bright  enough,  but  he  was  one  of  the  greatest  little 
rascals  on  the  face  of  the  earth.  At  first  we  thought  he  was  a 
marvel.  He  could  serve  legal  papers  better  than  any  one  I  have 
ever  known.  Once  we  wanted  to  serve  a  summons  upon  Daniel 
Drew,  a  well-known  "financier,"  but  then  apparently  in  hiding. 
Nobody  could  find  him,  and  a  number  of  suits  against  him  were 
hanging  fire  on  that  account.  I  despatched  George  to  serve  him 
with  the  papers.  After  a  few  hours  he  returned  and  cried  tri 
umphantly:  "I've  done  it.  I  went  to  his  house  and  they  told  me 
he  was  sick,  but  I  sat  down  in  the  hall  and  said  I'd  wait  till  he 
got  well.  The  butler  ordered  me  out  but  I  wouldn't  go;  then  he 
went  into  a  back  room  to  talk  with  somebody.  I  felt  sure  Mr. 
Drew  was  there,  so  I  followed  and  opened  the  door  and  served 
the  summons  on  him  in  bed."  Our  claim  was  among  the  few  that 
were  paid.  It  is  easy  to  see  that  such  a  boy  was  valuable 
in  a  practice  which,  like  that  of  most  beginners,  consisted 
largely  of  claims  against  decrepit  financiers  and  other  lame 
ducks. 

Moreover,  George  seemed  to  have  a  great  number  of  clients  of 
his  own  whom  he  brought  to  the  office.  We  could  not  under 
stand  how  it  was  that  he  had  so  many  friends  who  wanted  to 
engage  in  litigation,  until  one  day  one  of  these  clients  related 
to  us  George's  accounts  of  our  wonderful  influence  over  judges 
and  our  control  of  juries  which  inevitably  lured  victory  to  perch 
upon  our  banners.  I  had  noticed  that  whenever  George  brought 
a  new  client  there  was  pretty  sure  to  come  a  request  for  an 
increase  of  wages,  so  that  the  little  scamp  had  his  own  interest  in 
the  general  prosperity  of  our  business. 

I  caught  him,  however,  several  times  in  flagrant e  delict o.  Once 
when  I  sent  him  to  copy  a  record  at  the  Registrar's  office,  I  spied 
him  playing  billiards,  and  when  he  came  back  there  was  a  cock- 
and-bull  story  that  some  one  else  was  using  the  book  so  that  he 
had  to  wait  for  it.  He  got  into  trouble  at  last  with  the  police 
and  we  had  to  discharge  him.  Thereupon  a  little  Frenchman,  the 
keeper  of  a  restaurant  near  by,  appeared  with  a  long  bill  for 
lunches  furnished  to  George,  claimed  that  he  had  given  him  credit 
because  he  worked  for  us  and  wanted  to  know  if  we  would  not 
pay.  It  was  monstrous  that  such  a  bill  should  be  repudi- 


LAW  PRACTICE  IN  NEW  YORK  21 

ated.  "Si  j'etais  un  tailleur,  monsieur!  Le  tailleur  on  paye  quand 
on  veut,  mais  pour  la  nourriture!" 

The  law  practice  of  the  firm  of  Foulke  and  Malocsay  grew 
slowly.  Our  arrangements  were  very  primitive.  We  two  with 
the  office  boy  composed  the  entire  establishment;  later  we  had  a 
student.  Our  method  of  keeping  accounts  was  simple.  If  we 
had  to  pay  the  office  boy  or  buy  coal  I  took  one-half  of  the  money 
out  of  my  pocket  and  Malocsay  took  one-half  out  of  his.  When 
a  fee  came  in  we  cashed  the  check  and  divided  it  in  the  same 
way.  Our  offices  were  just  under  the  rooms  of  the  Associated 
Press,  and  boys  kept  running  up  and  down  the  stairs  back  of  us 
all  day  and  all  night  with  messages  to  and  from  the  different 
newspapers.  We  sometimes  looked  down  upon  curious  sights  from 
our  windows:  the  procession,  for  instance,  when  the  Grand  Duke 
Alexis  came  to  New  York;  and  the  great  crowd  which  assembled 
and  waited  in  vain  for  hours  to  see  a  man  fly  from  Trinity  Church 
steeple  up  to  Fulton  Street,  as  announced  in  the  morning  papers, 
the  announcement  being  a  hoax  by  the  actor  Sothern,  who  was  a 
great  practical  joker. 

We  had  a  good  deal  of  law  business  in  Brooklyn,  where  my 
partner  lived.  One  day  we  went  together  to  try  a  case  in  the 
City  Court  there  and  found  no  ferry  boats  running  and  the  river 
covered  with  ice.  Upon  this  we  walked  across  in  safety,  arriving 
before  the  opening  of  court.  When  the  judge  was  told  what  we 
had  done  we  were  rewarded  by  the  announcement  that  he  wouldn't 
require  the  attorneys  on  the  other  side  to  do  any  such  thing  as 
that,  whereupon  he  postponed  the  case. 

I  recall  a  trial  where  our  firm  had  been  retained  by  a  widow 
to  collect  money  on  a  life-insurance  policy  which  her  husband  had 
taken  out  a  year  or  two  before  his  death.  The  insurance  com 
pany  defended  the  case  upon  the  ground  that  the  deceased  had 
represented  that  his  heart  was  in  sound  condition,  whereas  he  was 
then  suffering  from  a  serious  valvular  lesion  which  subsequently 
caused  his  death. 

The  trial  took  place  at  Riverhead,  then  a  little  country  town 
in  the  eastern  part  of  Long  Island.  My  partner  and  I  were 
astounded  when  the  physicians  of  two  other  New  York  insurance 
companies  both  testified  that  a  few  days  before  the  policy  was 


22  EARLY  LIFE 

issued  they  had  examined  and  rejected  the  man  on  account  of 
organic  disease  of  the  heart.  The  case  seemed  pretty  dark  for  us, 
but  fortunately  the  two  doctors  did  not  quite  agree  as  to  the 
symptoms.  I  cross-examined  them  thoroughly  as  to  their  knowl 
edge  of  the  valves  of  the  heart  as  well  as  a  lot  of  other  things 
which  were  mere  jargon  to  the  jurymen.  On  the  whole  the  physi 
cians  sustained  themselves  fairly  well,  though  there  were  trifling 
inaccuracies.  They  were  decidedly  conceited  as  to  their  own 
attainments. 

In  the  meantime  a  plain-looking  country  doctor  who  happened 
to  be  a  witness  in  another  case  was  sitting  near  me.  He  seemed 
irritated  at  the  superior  airs  of  his  city  brethren  and  pointed  out 
to  me  some  weak  points  in  their  testimony.  It  occurred  to  me 
it  would  be  a  good  thing  to  call  him,  and  I  did  so.  The  examina 
tion  was  to  the  following  tenor: 

"Doctor,  how  long  have  you  been  engaged  in  the  practice  of 
medicine?" 

"Thirty-seven  years." 

"Where?" 

"Right  here,  sir,  in  this  immediate  neighbourhood." 

"Doctor,  I  desire  to  call  your  attention  to  the  following  symp 
toms  and  ask  what  disease  of  the  heart,  if  any,  they  indicate." 

Here  I  repeated  all  the  symptoms  testified  to  by  both  the  physi 
cians  called  by  the  defendant.  /  was  very  particidar  not  to  leave 
anything  out.  His  answer  was: 

"No  disease  under  the  sun." 

"What  do  you  mean  by  that?" 

"I  mean  that  such  symptoms  as  you  describe  cannot  possibly 
all  exist  together." 

"Have  you  ever  examined  a  man  to  see  if  he  had  any  organic 
disease  of  the  heart?" 

"Hundreds  of  times." 

"How  can  you  tell?" 

"Well,  I  just  put  my  ear  close  to  the  heart  like  this  (showing 
the  jury)  and  then  if  I  hear  something  that  sounds  like  the  purring 
of  a  cat  I  know  that  he  has  some  organic  trouble." 

By  this  time  the  jury  had  pricked  up  their  ears.  Here  was 
no  stranger,  no  conceited  city  man  talking  about  a  stethoscope 


LAW  PRACTICE  IN  NEW  YORK  23 

or  sphygmograph,  and  a  lot  of  other  incomprehensible  things  with 
unpronounceable  names,  but  this  was  the  good  doctor  who  had 
pulled  them  safely  through  their  own  afflictions,  who  had  brought 
their  babies  into  the  world  and  treated  them  for  measles,  mumps 
and  scarlet  fever.  There  was  no  humbug  about  such  a  man  as 
that. 

Now  there  had  been  no  evidence  of  anything  like  the  purring 
of  a  cat.  What  then  could  be  plainer  than  the  conclusion  that 
if  these  foolish  city  doctors  found  anything  wrong  it  must  have 
been  some  mere  temporary  and  functional  disorder  which  did  not 
invalidate  the  written  representations  made  by  the  deceased? 

I  became  quite  impassioned  in  my  closing  address.  I  resented 
with  special  bitterness  the  contention  of  the  other  side  that  we 
had  offered  no  evidence  to  contradict  the  physicians  they  had 
called,  and  I  read  to  them  with  great  solemnity  the  certificate 
made  in  the  policy  by  the  company's  own  physician  that  the 
man  was  sound.  I  was  proceeding  to  demolish  the  medical  attain 
ments  of  the  two  city  upstarts  and  to  draw  the  inevitable  conclu 
sion  from  the  absence  of  all  "purring"  in  the  heart  of  the  de 
ceased.  I  knew  the  jury  was  with  me,  but  suddenly  I  felt  a  tap 
upon  my  shoulder  and  heard  the  word  "Stop"  from  the  lips  of  my 
partner.  "The  case  is  settled.  They  give  us  seventy-five  per 
cent  of  all  we  ask." 

"The  jury  will  be  dismissed,"  said  the  judge,  and  he  added, 
"The  only  thing  I  regret  is  that  I  couldn't  hear  the  end  of  that 
purr-oration." 

I  grew  very  fond  of  my  profession.  There  was  a  keen  delight 
in  preparing  new  schemes  to  circumvent  the  adversary  and,  in 
jury  trials,  to  convince  the  twelve  honest  men  and  true  that  all 
the  merits  of  the  universe  encircled  the  cause  of  the  client  whom 
we  represented.  Lawyers  are  often  accused  of  saying  on  behalf  of 
their  clients  things  they  do  not  believe;  of  seeking  to 

"Make  the  worse  appear 
The  better  reason  to  perplex  and  dash 
Maturest  counsels." 

I  think  their  shortcomings  do  not  lie  so  much  in  that  direction 
as  in  the  line  of  another  frailty  of  human  nature,  and  that  is  the 


24  EARLY  LIFE 

tendency,  after  one  has  once  become  a  partisan,  to  see  things  only 
through  glasses  so  strongly  coloured  that  the  white  light  of  truth 
will  not  pass  through.  I  do  not  think  I  ever  accepted  a  retainer 
when  I  believed  that  my  client  was  lying  to  me  or  was  giving 
me  a  case  tainted  with  fraud  or  injustice.  But  it  is  not  a  hard 
thing  to  believe  your  client.  He  can  nearly  always  put  his  side 
of  the  question  in  the  best  light,  and  once  having  made  his  cause 
your  own,  it  is  not  hard  to  believe  that  it  is  always  the  other  man's 
contention  and  the  other  man's  evidence  which  is  replete  with 
iniquity. 

The  clients  of  young  lawyers  (and  mine  were  no  exception) 
are  often  queer  fish.  Once  after  the  firm  of  Foulke  and  Malocsay 
had  dissolved,  I  was  sitting  at  my  desk  after  everybody  else,  office 
boy  and  all,  had  gone  home.  A  faint  tap  was  heard  at  the  door. 
"Come  in,"  I  cried,  and  there  entered  a  small  young  man  with  a 
thin,  pale  face  and  pointed  chin,  with  a  sharp  Hebrew  nose, 
greasy,  black  hair  and  soft,  dark  eyes.  He  was  none  too  clean 
in  appearance.  The  stubble  of  a  very  black  beard  was  upon 
his  cheeks  and  chin.  He  wore  a  shabby  fur  cap  and  a  long 
caftan  trimmed  with  fur  reaching  nearly  to  his  feet.  He 
walked  in  very  quietly — you  could  not  hear  his  step  upon  the 
carpet. 

"Is  lawyer  Foulke  in?" 

"He  is." 

"Is  this  lawyer  Foulke?" 

"It  is;  what  can  I  do  for  you?" 

"Mr.  Foulke,"  he  began  in  a  singsong  voice,  "I  belong  to  de 
congregation  Chebra  Kadisha  Ahaveth  Joseph,  vitch  has  a  syna 
gogue  at  de  corner  of  Elderidge  unt  Division  Street  in  a  beelding 
vitch  is  owned  by  Felix  Marx,  unt  de  synagogue  is  in  de  tird 
story  of  de  beelding,  at  de  top.  Unt  vat  you  tink  dat  Felix  Marx 
does?  He  rents  de  second  story  of  de  beelding  to  de  congregation 
Chebra  Kadisha  Ahaveth  Israel,  and  sometimes  dere  is  some 
strangers  dat  come  and  dey  would  gife  a  leetle  money  to  de 
synagogue,  but  dey  stop  on  de  vay  up  at  de  odder  congregation, 
for  dey  don't  know  de  difference;  so  ve  don't  get  none  of  de 
money  at  all ;  and  den  Felix  Marx  he  promise  us  dat  he  put  in  a 
great  big  vide  iron  staircase  up  to  de  synagogue,  but  instead  of 


LAW  PRACTICE  IN  NEW  YORK  25 

dat  he  leave  in  a  dirty  little  vooden  staircase,  unt  if  der  vas  to  be 
a  fire  in  dat  beelding  not  a  soul  vould  escape  alive.  Unt  de  place 
vere  he  vos  to  put  dat  new  staircase,  he  rent  dat  place  to  a 
butcher!  Mister  Foulke,"  he  concluded,  in  an  insinuating  voice, 
though  somewhat  exhausted  by  the  above  recital  uttered  all  in 
one  breath,  "Mr.  Foulke,  don't  you  tink  you  could  get  injunc 
tion  against  dat  butcher?" 

I  confess  that  the  thought  of  seeking  retribution  at  the  hands 
of  the  butcher  for  the  sins  of  Felix  Marx  struck  me  as  original, 
but  the  remedy  happened  in  this  case  to  be  an  easy  one.  So  I 
told  my  visitor  to  leave  the  matter  with  me  and  I  would  see 
what  could  be  done.  I  reported  the  premises  to  the  Department 
of  Buildings  as  dangerous.  An  inspection  showed  that  the  com 
plaint  was  well  founded,  Marx  was  ordered  either  to  tear  down 
the  building  (an  ancient  wooden  structure)  or  else  to  put  in  a 
fire-proof  stairway  up  to  the  synagogue.  Within  two  weeks  the 
butcher  was  ejected  and  the  work  began.  That  any  lawyer  in  New 
York  could  reach  such  a  result  so  quickly  was  a  marvel  to  the 
congregation  Chebra  Kadisha  Ahaveth  Joseph,  and  I  soon  had 
the  greater  part  of  the  business  of  the  members  of  that  congrega 
tion.  This  business  was  of  a  motley  character.  My  original  client 
was  overtaken  not  long  afterwards  by  misfortune.  He  had  been 
engaged  in  the  fur  business  and  he  had  a  partner,  one  Harris 
Levy,  who  bought  and  sold  the  goods  and  furnished  the  expe 
rience,  while  my  man  supplied  the  capital.  But  the  affair 
ended  with  that  exchange  of  capital  for  experience  which  is 
not  uncommon  in  such  cases;  for  one  day  my  client,  who  had 
committed  some  trifling  misdemeanour,  had  been  arrested  by 
the  police,  ready  enough  to  pounce  upon  a  poor  devil  of  a  Jew, 
and  had  been  locked  up  in  the  station  house  overnight.  Next 
morning  when  he  was  set  at  liberty  and  went  back  to  his  little 
shop  he  found  it  entirely  empty;  caps,  gloves,  muffs,  every 
vestige  of  anything  salable,  had  disappeared  together  with  his 
thrifty  partner.  He  came  to  me  tearing  his  hair  and  besought 
me  to  rescue  him  from  ruin.  I  told  him  no tHing  could  be  done 
till  we  had  first  discovered  where  the  stock  had  been  hidden.  It 
seems  he  suspected  a  certain  pawnbroker  in  Center  Street,  but 
he  had  no  proof,  and  the  pawnbroker  vigorously  denied  ever  hav- 


26  EARLY  LIFE 

ing  seen  such  a  thing  as  a  stock  of  furs.  Some  detective  work  was 
necessary  and  as  there  was  no  money  with  which  to  employ  any 
one  else,  I  undertook  the  task  myself.  I  prepared  the  papers 
in  a  replevin  suit  against  the  delinquent  partner  and  the  suspected 
receiver  of  the  goods,  alleging  fraud  and  conspiracy;  and  pocket 
ing  the  summons  and  complaint,  I  went  to  the  shop  of  the  pawn 
broker,  clad  in  a  rather  shabby  suit  of  clothes  and  with  as  guilty 
a  look  upon  my  face  as  I  could  manage  to  put  on.  There  were 
one  or  two  other  persons  in  the  shop.  I  called  him  aside  and 
told  him  I  wanted  to  speak  to  him  particularly  on  some  private 
business.  He  answered  gruffly,  "Ve  don't  do  no  private  beesness 
here,"  but  when  I  pulled  out  of  my  pocket  some  jewels  of  con 
siderable  value  and  showed  them  to  him  he  added  in  a  lower 
tone  and  with  a  suggestive  smile,  "But  I  vill  see  you."  There 
upon  he  conducted  me  through  a  dark  passage  leading  to  a  little 
room  in  the  rear  of  the  store.  On  the  way  through  the  passage  I 
noticed  that  there  were  some  shelves  on  the  right-hand  side,  and 
as  I  followed  him  slowly  I  put  out  my  hands  along  the  wall  to 
find  out  what  they  contained.  I  felt  the  soft  touch  of  fur  against 
my  fingers  and,  suddenly  striking  a  match  and  taking  one  of  the 
caps  in  my  hand,  I  found  in  the  inside  the  name  of  the  firm  to 
which  my  client  had  belonged.  The  pawnbroker  turned  upon 
me  and  asked  what  I  was  doing,  whereupon,  quickly  putting  back 
the  cap  upon  the  shelf,  I  produced  from  my  pocket  the  copy  of 
the  summons  and  complaint  in  the  suit  and  served  them  upon 
him.  He  was  wild  with  rage,  jumping  up  and  down  in  his  excite 
ment.  I  did  not  stop  to  listen  to  his  ravings,  but  made  my  way 
back  to  my  office,  where  my  client  was  awaiting  me  and  I  commu 
nicated  to  him  the  happy  result  of  my  enquiries. 

It  was  some  months  before  the  case  could  be  brought  to  trial. 
One  day  I  was  walking  up  Broadway  on  my  way  home  when 
whom  should  I  meet  but  my  client.  He  was  looking  more  cheer 
ful  than  I  had  seen  him  at  any  time  since  his  calamity,  and 
he  had  with  him  a  stout,  florid  Hebrew  with  a  red  necktie  and 
a  large  diamond  pin  in  his  shirt.  He  said  to  me:  "Mr.  Foulke,  I 
vant  to  present  you  to  my  friend,  Mr.  Emmanuel.  Mr.  Emman 
uel,  dis  is  my  lawyer,  Mr.  Foulke."  Mr.  Emmanuel  seemed  to  be 
quite  well  acquainted  with  the  state  of  affairs  in  regard  to  the 


LAW  PRACTICE  IN  NEW  YORK  27 

suit,  for,  taking  me  apart  just  around  the  corner  of  a  side  street, 
he  asked  me: 

"Dis  case  against  Mr.  Harris  Levy  and  de  pawnbroker,  ven 
will  it  be  tried?" 

I  told  him  probably  in  a  few  weeks;  whereupon  he  added, 
handing  me  his  card: 

"Now,  Mr.  Foulke,  before  dis  case  comes  up  I  yant  you  to  tell 
me  shust  exactly  vot  you  vant  to  prove  and  shust  so  many  vit~ 
nesses  you  vant,  you  shall  have  dem" 

I  made  no  answer  and  turned  away,  at  which  he  seemed  greatly 
surprised.  He  evidently  could  not  understand  the  conduct  of  a 
lawyer  who  would  not  seize  such  opportunities.  I  soon  after 
wards  settled  the  case,  a  settlement  favourable  to  my  client,  but 
my  motive  in  making  it  was  largely  the  fear  that  although  the 
case  was  a  just  one,  it  might  be  supported  by  manufactured 
evidence. 

I  had  charge  of  certain  pieces  of  property  in  Chatham  Street 
leased  to  Hebrew  tenants,  and  on  the  first  of  each  month  1  used 
to  betake  myself  thither  to  collect  the  rent.  On  one  occasion  I 
found  the  shop  of  Mr.  Samuels,  one  of  these  tenants,  closed,  and 
in  the  door  was  the  announcement  of  an  assignment  in  insolvency 
proceedings.  Failing  to  gain  admittance,  I  returned  to  my  office, 
to  find  Mr.  Samuels  awaiting  me.  His  first  remark  was,  "Maybe 
you  vas  up  to  de  store  to  get  de  rent." 

"Yes,  I  have  just  come  from  there,  and  I  found  a  notice  that 
you  have  failed  in  business  and  have  made  an  assignment." 

"Yes,  ve  had  a  leetle  misfortune,  but  de  rent  is,  all  right,  Mr. 
Foulke." 

Here  he  produced  a  corpulent  roll  of  bank  bills  from  his 
pocket,  from  which  he  counted  out  the  requisite  sum. 

"You  vill  please  make  de  receipt,"  he  added,  "in  de  name  of 
L.  Samuels  and  not  in  de  name  of  Myer  L.  Samuels,  and  if  you 
should  ever  go  up  dere  again  and  find  de  door  closed  and  a  notice 
like  dat — a  notice  of  an  assignment — you  shust  give  two  raps  and 
den  three  raps  like  dis  (showing  me),  an'  ve  let  you  in.  For  de 
rent  is  always  right,  Mr.  Foulke." 

Although  a  large  city  is  the  place  of  widest  opportunity  for 
the  old  and  experienced  practitioner,  it  is  by  no  means  the  best 


28  EARLY  LIFE 

place  for  a  beginner.  If  he  has  conducted  a  skilful  cross- 
examination  or  made  a  good  speech  to  the  jury,  the  fame  of 
it  is  not  spread  abroad  as  it  would  be  in  a  country  town.  The 
people  of  a  great  city  commonly  take  little  interest  in  the  ordi 
nary  proceedings  of  their  tribunals,  although  some  who  are  actu 
ally  present  when  a  young  lawyer  makes  a  hit  may  afterwards 
be  of  service  to  him  in  his  career. 

I  remember  a  small  case  I  once  had  in  one  of  the  District 
Courts  against  a  publisher.  The  man  had  attempted  some  tri 
fling  deception  and  in  an  impassioned  appeal  to  the  jury  I  held 
up  his  conduct  to  reprobation,  denouncing  him  with  vehemence, 
and  I  won  my  verdict. 

That  afternoon  I  saw  him  walking  into  my  office.  My  first 
impression  was  that  he  had  come  to  commit  some  act  of  violence, 
and  I  rose  rather  quickly  from  my  chair  so  as  to  be  ready  for 
him.  But,  no!  In  the  friendliest  manner  possible  he  laid  before 
me  the  facts  in  two  other  cases  much  more  important  than  the 
one  in  which  I  had  just  defeated  him,  in  which  he  claimed  that 
he  had  been  wronged  and  he  wanted  me  to  pound  the  other 
fellow  in  the  same  way  I  had  just  pounded  him. 

While  I  was  young  in  practice  I  improved  every  possible  oppor 
tunity  to  attend  celebrated  trials.  Among  these  was  the  Jumel 
will  case.  I  also  heard  a  part  of  the  closing  arguments  in  the 
suit  brought  by  Theodore  Tilton  against  Henry  Ward  Beecher 
for  criminal  conversation.  I  remember  well  a  passage  in  the 
speech  of  William  A.  Beach,  the  leading  counsel  for  the  plaintiff. 
His  diction  was  superb.  Looking  over  the  delegates  for  Plymouth 
Church,  who  attended  in  large  numbers,  he  said:  "The  defend 
ant's  counsel  wished  for  the  hundred  eyes  of  Argus;  he  has  them 
(sweeping  his  hand  toward  that  part  of  the  room  occupied  by 
this  delegation),  and  more  too.  He  wished  for  the  hundred 
arms  of  Briareus;  he  has  them,  and  more  too.  And  he  had  no 
need  to  wish  for  the  gold  of  Midas,  for  he  has  that  a  hundred 
fold." 

REMOVAL   TO   INDIANA 

But  I  was  not  long  to  have  the  advantage  of  hearing  these 
displays  of  forensic  oratory.  Although  my  law  practice  in  New 


REMOVAL  TO  INDIANA  29 

York  had  been  quite  as  good  as  a  beginner  had  a  right  to  expect 
and  was  steadily  growing,  there  were  family  reasons  which  made 
it  desirable  for  my  wife  and  me  to  go  to  Richmond,  Indiana,  where 
her  parents  resided.  I  had  received  an  offer  of  partnership  from 
one  of  the  leading  lawyers  of  that  place,  Mr.  Jesse  P.  Siddall, 
who  was  the  local  counsel  for  the  Pan  Handle  Railroad  Com 
pany,  a  part  of  the  Pennsylvania  system.  I  accepted  this  offer 
and,  after  turning  over  the  cases  on  my  docket  to  Mr.  William 
W.  Ladd,  an  able  lawyer  and  one  of  my  former  colleagues  at  the 
Law  School,  I  gave  up  my  New  York  office  and  my  Bloomfield 
home,  and  early  in  the  year  1876  removed  to  Indiana. 


CHAPTER  II 

LIFE  IN  INDIANA 

FROM  the  abyss  of  the  tumultuous  street, 

The  roar  of  the  great  city  and  its  glare, 

The  multitude  whose  feverish  pulses  beat 

With  evanescent  hopes  and  wild  despair, — 

In  my  young  manhood  did  I  come  to  thee, 

And  found  the  balm  of  thy  serenity. 

And  evermore,  threading  thy  quiet  ways, 

Reclining  by  thy  hesitating  streams, 

Where  sheltering  sycamores  hid  me  from  the  blaze 

Of  summer  suns — half  waking,  half  in  dreams — 

I  did  perceive  thy  sylvan  beauty  grow 

Into  my  soul  until  I  came  to  know 

I  loved  thee,  that  thy  heart  had  answered  mine; 

And  all  the  more,  now  that  my  days  decline, 

Thy  spirit  broods  upon  me.     Not  the  sea, 

Nor  the  unutterable  majesty 

Of  Alpine  peak,  nor  the  white  foam  and  spray 

Of  glittering  cataract  can  so  win  their  way 

Into  my  heart.     I  have  dwelt  with  thee  too  long 

To  love  another  while  thy  beech  trees  bend 

Their  lowly  limbs  to  greet  me  as  a  friend, 

And  take  from  me  the  tribute  of  a  song. 

— To  Indiana,  Centennial  Ode,  1916. 

THE   RICHMOND   HOME 

My  life  has  been  a  singularly  happy  one.  It  has  had  no  disas 
trous  episodes,  no  serious  disappointments.  Doubtless  this  was 
partly  due  to  the  fact  that  ambition  has  not  often  outrun  the 
attainable  and  that  I  have  been  content  with  such  good  things  as 
have  fallen  to  my  lot,  among  them  a  home  life  ideal  in  its  external 
setting  as  well  as  on  its  spiritual  side  and  such  companionships 
and  friendships  as  have  been  stimulating  at  the  time  and,  for  the 
most  part,  steadfast  throughout  many  years. 

This  home  life  has  centred  in  a  place  far  removed  from  the  city 

30 


THE  RICHMOND  HOME  31 

of  New  York.  Richmond,  Indiana,  was  to  be  my  abode  for  the 
rest  of  my  life.  In  1877,  the  year  after  coming  to  Richmond,  I 
purchased  my  present  residence,  with  a  tract  of  three  acres  on  the 
outskirts  of  the  city.  The  house  was  an  old  one,  a  substantial 
brick  structure,  to  which,  some  ten  years  later,  when  it  became 
hard  crowded  by  books  and  babies,  an  addition  was  made  con 
taining  a  large  room  for  a  library.  This  has  been  to  all  the 
family  a  source  of  continuing  delight.  Here  against  the  long 
walls  on  either  side  are  the  books,  a  collection  which,  modest 
enough  in  earlier  years,  had  grown  beyond  the  capacity  of  the 
original  house  and  embraced  several  thousand  volumes  in  various 
languages  and  on  all  sorts  of  subjects.  Such  a  collection  has  a 
way  of  constantly  growing,  and  this  one  has  now  overflowed  into 
still  other  rooms,  so  that  to  keep  down  the  number  of  books,  many 
that  have  served  their  purpose  and  are  no  longer  needed  are  sent 
to  the  public  library  each  year.  Above  the  long  bookcases  lining 
the  wall,  and  indeed  wherever  else  they  can  be  placed,  are  bronzes, 
marbles,  plaster  casts,  armour,  weapons,  and  other  curios,  and 
wherever  there  is  wall  space  are  hung  paintings,  gathered  from 
year  to  year  in  various  parts  of  the  world,  which  furnish  repre 
sentative  examples  of  the  Italian,  Dutch,  Spanish,  German  and 
other  schools  from  early  times  down  to  the  present  day.1 

Here  is  an  old  Flemish  tapestry,  there  a  Renaissance  cabinet  in 
ebony  and  ivory.  There  are  antiques  of  many  sorts,  from  Baby 
lonian  tablets  and  Aztec  effigies  to  coats  of  mail  and  early  Norse 
implements.  Little  system  has  been  followed  in  the  choice,  yet 
the  specimens  are  most  of  them  beautiful  and  living  with  them 
has  had  a  decided  influence  in  the  education  of  our  children,  and 
later  of  our  grandchildren,  who  often  come  for  long  visits  to  the 
family  home.2 

1  By  careful  selection  in  all  sorts  of  places  a  good  deal  that  is  valua 
ble  has  been  collected.     I  once  bought  in  a  junk  shop  in  Berlin  an  old 
painting  of  the  Virgin  and  Child  with  St.  Elizabeth  and  John  the  Bap 
tist.    It  was  in  bad  condition  and  in  restoring  it  and  taking  it  off  of  a 
second  canvas  which  had  been  used  as  backing,  it  was  identified  by  an 
authoritative  expert  as  a  painting  of  the  school  of  the  Carracci. 

2  One  little  girl,  even  before  she  could  read,  once  stood  before  the 
rows  of  books,  stamped  her  foot,  and  said  indignantly,  "There  you 


32  LIFE  IN  INDIANA 

My  study  is  upstairs,  a  large,  well-lighted,  airy  room — the  best 
room  that  ever  a  man  had  to  work  in — with  a  broad  table  in  the 
middle  and  another  in  the  corner  for  my  secretary.  Along  one 
side  is  a  long  book-case  with  a  working  library,  and  on  the  wall 
above  hang  copper  plates  and  etchings  by  Durer,  Rembrandt  and 
others.  Over  the  mantelpiece  is  a  steel  engraving  of  Roosevelt, 
and  in  winter  there  is  a  bright  wood  fire  on  the  hearth  below. 

There  are  trees  not  far  from  the  windows  and  rose  vines  on 
a  trellis  where  the  birds  sing  through  the  long  summer  days.  I 
hear  doves  and  orioles,  robins,  redbirds,  and  meadow  larks,  and 
some  of  them  stay  through  the  winter  too.  There  are  others 
less  attractive,  sparrows  and  owls  and  innumerable  flocks  of  black 
birds  which  fly  north  in  the  spring  and  south  in  the  fall.  I  do 
not  know  the  names  nor  the  songs  of  all  of  them,  but  I  feel  a 
good  deal  as  Shakespeare  did  about  the  stars  when  he  wrote: 

"Those  earthly  godfathers  of  heaven's  lights 
That  give  a  name  to  every  fixed  star 
Have  no  more  profit  of  their  shining  nights 
Than  we  who  walk  and  know  not  what  they  are." 

There  is  delight  not  only  in  the  songs  but  in  watching  the 
songsters  build  their  nests  and  rear  their  broods  close  to  the 
windows. 

The  grounds  have  flowers  in  abundance,  both  native  and  exotic, 
while  palms  and  other  tropical  plants  come  out  each  spring  from 
the  greenhouse  and  go  back  each  autumn.  These  are  the  special 
care  of  my  wife,  who  is  filled  with  delight  when  Jacob,  the  gar 
dener,  brings  in  some  choice  specimen  for  writing  desk  or  dining 
table. 

Why  speak  of  all  this  which  is  the  common  experience  of  so 
many?  Because  it  is  part  of  that  quiet  joy  of  daily  life,  which 
is  after  all  the  greatest  thing  on  earth  and  which  has  so  attached 
us  to  this  home  that  we  would  not  change  it  for  any  other  in 
the  world.  We  love  the  sweep  of  the  lawn,  the  silhouettes  of  the 

are,  and  you've  got  such  beautiful  things  in  you  and  I  can't  get  at 
them."  Another  child,  at  the  age  of  four  years,  gravely  introduced  a 
farmer  visitor  to  "her  friend,  William  Shakespeare,"  whose  full- 
length  figure  adorned  a  stained  glass  window  close  at  hand. 


THE  RICHMOND  HOME  33 

pine  trees  against  the  evening  sky,  the  Triton  in  the  fountain, 
the  Pan  among  the  bushes,  the  carved  Venetian  pozzo  with  its 
flowers,  and  the  wild  grapevine  that  climbs  over  the  branches 
of  the  dead  pine  tree,  clothing  it  more  luxuriantly  than  ever  did 
its  own  foliage. 

This  is  the  scene  against  which  as  a  background  our  daily  life 
has  been  projected. 

The  change  from  the  bustle  of  a  metropolis  to  these  more  quiet, 
yet  more  attractive  surroundings  was  a  radical  one.  Richmond 
was  at  that  time  a  prosperous  city  of  about  fifteen  thousand  in 
habitants  in  the  midst  of  a  fertile  and  attractive  agricultural 
country.  The  city  depended  largely  upon  its  manufactures,  chiefly 
of  agricultural  implements.  It  was  known  as  "The  Quaker  City 
of  the  West,"  having  been  settled  near  the  beginning  of  the 
nineteenth  century  by  members  of  the  Society  of  Friends  who  had 
immigrated  thither  in  considerable  numbers,  principally  from 
North  Carolina,  on  account  of  their  objection  to  slavery. 

The  town  was  attractive.  There  were  few  fine  residences,  but 
there  were  no  slums;  little  that  was  ambitious,  but  a  great  deal 
that  was  comfortable;  no  fashionable  society,  but  no  "submerged 
tenth,"  and  none  of  the  social  struggles  common  in  the  larger 
cities  of  the  East.  Nearly  all  the  inhabitants,  including  a  great 
many  of  the  workmen,  owned  their  own  homes  with  trim  door- 
yards  in  front  of  them. 

There  was,  moreover,  an  intellectual  atmosphere  of  a  rather 
simple  kind.  Just  west  of  the  town  lay  Earlham  College,  a 
substantial  Quaker  institution.  There  were  literary  societies, 
scientific  societies  and  a  public  school  system  which  was  then 
one  of  the  very  best  in  the  country. 

We  remained,  during  the  first  year,  at  "Reeveston,"  the  home 
of  my  wife's  parents,  a  country  place  of  some  ninety  acres  east 
of  the  town.  The  grounds  were  well  laid  out  and  contained  a 
small  deer  park,  a  conservatory,  and  a  lake  for  fish  and  swans. 

At  the  end  of  this  year  I  purchased  the  home  which  I  have 
just  described.  It  was  separated  from  "Reeveston"  by  only  one 
intervening  place  and  was  situated  in  the  town  of  Linden  Hill,  a 
village  embracing  about  eighty  acres  adjoining  Richmond  and 
containing  perhaps  a  hundred  inhabitants.  This  was  then  quite 


34  LIFE  IN  INDIANA 

a  rural  neighbourhood  and  formed  a  separate  corporation.  The 
town  government  was  for  many  years  administered  by  three 
trustees,  of  whom  I  was  one.  Our  house  was  the  town  hall, 
and  the  deliberations  of  the  three  trustees  took  place  in  our 
dining-room.  The  only  remaining  functionary  was  a  man  who 
held  in  his  single  person  the  office  of  town  clerk,  treasurer,  assessor, 
and  marshal,  at  a  salary  of  seventy-five  dollars  a  year.  Our 
annual  budget  was  two  hundred  dollars,  and  the  taxes  were  pro 
portionately  moderate  until  the  general  growth  of  both  the  village 
and  the  adjoining  city  led  to  our  inclusion  into  the  larger  unit. 


THE    CHARM    OF    INDIANA 

It  was  not  only  in  our  immediate  surroundings  that  the  new 
life  in  Richmond  became  a  source  of  happiness.  The  Indiana 
landscape,  Indiana  life,  and  the  art  and  literature  which  sprang 
from  them,  soon  became  congenial. 

When  one  travels  through  this  Western  country  or  stays  in  it 
for  a  few  days  or  weeks  only,  he  will  find  little  to  charm  his 
imagination;  the  land  is  flat  or  gently  undulating,  the  woods  and 
streams  and  fields  have  little  at  first  to  startle  or  attract  the  eye. 
But  it  is  well  known  that  painters  do  not  find  the  best  subjects  for 
the  brush  in  the  sublimities  of  the  Alps  or  of  the  ocean,  but  in 
such  quiet  and  homely  scenes  as  are  found,  for  instance,  in  the 
lower  reaches  of  the  Seine,  to  which  so  many  distinguished  artists 
have  been  drawn.  The  picturesqueness  of  a  plain  agricultural 
landscape  often  transcends  for  the  purposes  of  art  the  boldest 
and  most  impressive  natural  scenery.  It  is  in  this  way  that  the 
charm  of  an  Indiana  landscape  creeps  into  the  soul.  It  is  closer 
and  more  intimate  than  more  ambitious  scenery.  There  is  a 
peculiar  attraction  in  the  Indiana  river  bottoms,  where  the  creeks 
wind  sluggishly  over  their  limestone  beds  underneath  arching 
sycamores.  These  trees  with  their  smooth,  mottled  trunks,  as 
well  as  the  beeches  whose  branches  sweep  close  to  the  ground 
are  peculiarly  typical  of  this  section  of  Indiana. 

It  is  this  homely  quality  of  the  landscape  which  has  led  to 
the  development  of  the  Indiana  school  of  painting,  the  work  of 
men  who  have  had  no  very  wide  range  and  who  have  done  noth- 


THE  ART  ASSOCIATION  35 

ing  startling  in  the  world,  but  whose  productions  have  been  in 
fused  with  the  spirit  of  tranquil  beauty  and  poetry  which  is 
often  lacking  in  more  ambitious  efforts.  And  the  taste  of  a  con 
siderable  body  of  people  has  been  permeated  with  an  apprecia 
tion  of  this  beauty  in  art  and  literature  which  was  no  doubt 
accentuated  by  the  spiritual  hunger  of  those  who  were  far  away 
from  the  immediate  means  of  gratifying  their  tastes  and  who, 
therefore,  themselves  developed  the  things  they  longed  for.  This 
homely  quality  of  the  soil  has  also  led  to  the  growth  of  a  corre 
sponding  literature,  the  poetry  of  Riley,  the  character  sketches  of 
Abe  Martin  and  some  of  the  novels  of  Tarkington.  Indiana  lit 
erature,  whatever  be  its  merits  or  defects,  has  its  roots  in  the 
soil,  and  the  villages  and  the  countryside  have  formed  its  back 
ground. 

The  homespun  ways  of  the  rural  population  and  the  so-called 
Hoosier  dialect,  which  has  now  all  but  passed  away,  furnished  a 
natural  embellishment  to  our  literature.  It  was  amid  these  sur 
roundings  that  there  arose  a  remarkable  activity  of  the  people 
in  literary  clubs  and  similar  associations.  These  were  scattered 
everywhere  throughout  the  state  and  for  some  time  were  perhaps 
most  prominent  in  this  city  of  Richmond.  Our  Art  Association 
is  an  illustration.  It  has  had  a  widespread  influence  and  has 
been  followed  by  similar  organisations  in  many  other  cities. 


THE   ART   ASSOCIATION 

Some  twenty-five  Richmond  people  who  were  interested  in 
painting  and  sculpture  and  who  had  good  pictures  in  their  homes 
determined  to  have  a  public  exhibition  for  the  benefit  of  the  city 
and  organised  an  art  association  for  the  purpose.  The  exhibition 
was  held  in  one  of  the  public  school  buildings  and  was  free  to 
all.  It  consisted  chiefly  of  pictures  loaned  by  the  citizens.  The 
display  was  a  creditable  one,  and  it  was  determined  to  repeat 
the  experiment  and  finally  to  organise  a  permanent  association. 
We  were  fortunate  in  choosing  for  our  president  Mrs.  M.  F.  John 
ston,  who  had  taken  an  absorbing  interest  in  the  enterprise  and 
who  devoted  time  and  unflagging  energy  toward  making  the  move 
ment  a  permanent  success.  The  expense  was  very  little,  only 


36  LIFE  IN  INDIANA 

a  few  hundred  dollars  a  year.  The  aid  of  the  superintendent  of 
schools  was  enlisted  in  the  work,  and  painters  in  all  parts  of  the 
country  willingly  sent  their  productions  for  exhibition.  Then 
bronzes  and  marbles  were  added  to  the  collection,  as  well  as  tapes 
tries  and  a  good  deal  of  bric-a-brac  of  considerable  artistic  merit. 
A  little  later  a  New  York  man,  who  had  formerly  lived  in  Rich 
mond,  gave  five  hundred  dollars  a  year  for  a  number  of  years 
to  purchase  a  picture  to  be  selected  by  the  association.  One  of 
the  members  gave  two  prizes,  one  for  the  best  picture  exhibited 
by  an  Indiana  artist,  the  other  for  the  best  work  by  a  local  painter. 
It  was  astonishing  what  an  amount  of  competition  these  prizes 
elicited,  not  for  their  money  value,  which  was  slight,  but  for  the 
reputation  acquired  in  winning  them.  We  had  a  number  of  local 
artists,  and  the  quality  of  their  work,  sometimes  crude  at  the 
beginning,  has  gone  on  improving  until  some  of  them  are  well 
known  to-day  over  the  country.  In  connection  with  our  exhibi 
tion  there  was  usually  a  reception  the  opening  night,  and  painters 
from  other  cities — Cincinnati,  St.  Louis,  Indianapolis  and  Chi 
cago — who  had  been  brought  in  as  members  of  a  committee  to 
pass  upon  the  pictures,  often  gave  us  addresses  upon  subjects  con 
nected  with  their  work. 

The  City  Council  made  an  annual  appropriation  for  the  move 
ment,  a  thing  until  then  quite  unheard  of  in  this  country.  Later 
the  School  Board  began  to  take  a  more  direct  interest.  When 
a  new  High  School  building  was  erected,  three  large,  beautiful 
rooms  upon  the  upper  floor,  lighted  from  the  ceiling,  rooms  well 
designed  and  equipped,  were  devoted  to  the  Association,  and  a 
part  of  the  expense  of  the  exhibitions  was  assumed  by  the  Board. 
One  of  these  rooms  is  now  occupied  by  the  permanent  collection 
of  the  Association.  For  during  all  these  years  we  have  gone  on 
buying  pictures,  and  a  great  deal  of  care  and  very  good  taste 
were  shown  by  our  various  committees  in  their  selection.  A 
number  of  paintings  have  been  given  to  us,  and  though  we  have 
not  accepted  all  that  have  been  offered,  there  are  now  by  pur 
chase  and  gift  some  forty  pictures  of  excellent  quality  in  a  room 
which  is  open  to  the  public.  Among  these  are  first-rate  examples 
of  Wm.  M.  Chase,  Robert  Reid,  Ben  Foster,  Frank  Dumond, 


LOCAL  COLOUR  37 

Leonard  Ochtman,  John  Johansen,  Albert  Groll,  and  of  such  men 
as  Steele,  Forsyth,  Adams,  and  Bundy  of  Indiana.  The  work  of 
the  Association  kept  expanding.  Our  temporary  exhibitions  have 
now  increased  from  two  or  three  a  year  to  eight  or  nine,  so 
that  it  is  rather  an  unusual  thing  if  there  is  not  one  of  them  to 
be  seen  in  these  rooms,  in  addition  to  our  permanent  collection. 
It  may  be  a  collection  of  water  colours,  of  etchings  or  of  speci 
mens  of  decorative  art.  Just  at  the  entrance  of  these  rooms  is  a 
fountain,  "The  Boy  with  a  Tortoise,"  one  of  the  best  bronzes  of 
Janet  Scudder.  One  of  our  late  acquisitions  is  an  admirable  por 
trait  of  Wm.  M.  Chase  painted  by  himself.  The  Association  has 
done  all  this  out  of  an  amount  of  money  collected  from  its  mem 
bers  not  exceeding,  on  an  average,  a  thousand  dollars  a  year. 

The  success  of  Richmond  in  this  experiment  has  been  so  great 
that  other  cities  of  Indiana  and  elsewhere  have  followed  our 
example.  The  students  in  the  schools  visit  the  collections  as  part 
of  their  regular  work,  some  of  them  copy  from  the  paintings  or 
use  them  as  themes  from  which  to  develop  their  own  studies  or 
for  the  purpose  of  describing  and  criticising  them  in  written  com 
positions,  and  at  the  end  of  each  school  year  exhibitions  of  their 
own  work  are  given.  The  galleries  are  also  used  as  the  meeting 
place  of  the  Art  Study  Club,  the  Music  Study  Club,  and  for 
other  similar  purposes.  They  are  indeed  a  social  centre  for 
many  kinds  of  cultural  interests  and  are  useful  to  the  city  in  many 
ways  outside  their  primary  purpose  as  an  art  gallery. 


LOCAL   COLOUR 

But  I  must  now  return  to  an  earlier  period. 

There  is  a  good  deal  of  local  colour  in  a  place  like  Richmond, 
and  many  genial  personal  incidents  rise  in  my  memcry  connected 
with  our  neighbours  and  friends.  For  instance,  there  were  the 
Jacksons,  who  lived  next  to  us.  There  was  always  something  hap 
pening  there.  More  amusing  things  occurred  in  that  household 
than  in  any  other  that  I  ever  knew.  For  instance,  we  were  much 
pestered,  in  our  little  suburb  of  Linden  Hill,  by  cows,  which  at 
that  time  were  permitted  to  run  at  large.  Some  of  them  showed 


38  LIFE  IN  INDIANA 

great  dexterity  in  opening  gates  and  entering  premises  where 
their  presence  was  not  desired.  Mr.  Jackson  determined  that 
this  nuisance  must  be  stopped.  One  night  I  heard  a  cow  moving 
through  the  thicket  on  the  Jackson  side  of  the  fence,  then  a 
shot  rang  out  in  the  darkness,  and  an  animal  pranced  down  the 
lane,  opened  the  gate  and  disappeared.  Next  morning  Mr.  Jack 
son's  own  cow  was  missing.  A  long  search  began  and  she  was  at 
last  found  with  large  quantities  of  small  shot  imbedded  in  her 
skin. 

One  day  Mr.  Jackson's  brother  John,  a  portly  man,  came  upon 
a  visit;  his  host  hospitably  offered  him  what  was  supposed  to  be 
a  glass  of  whiskey;  but  when  he  drank  it,  it  did  not  taste  like 
whiskey  at  all.  It  was  arnica.  Would  arnica  poison  a  man  if 
taken  in  such  quantity?  No  one  knew.  His  brother  drove  post 
haste  to  the  doctor  to  see  if  the  dose  was  mortal  and  if  so  whether 
anything  could  be  done.  Hours  passed  and  he  did  not  return, 
while  John  writhed  and  groaned,  expecting  sudden  dissolution. 
Near  the  close  of  the  day  the  brother  appeared  and  John  en 
quired  what  was  to  be  his  fate.  "Oh,  the  doctor  said  there  was 
no  danger  and  no  need  of  doing  anything,  so  I  went  about  my 
business." 

"The  devil  you  did!"  exclaimed  John  in  a  fury,  "and  left  me 
here  suffering  the  torments  of  the  damned." 

Mrs.  Knott,  the  aged  stepmother  of  Mrs.  Jackson,  who  lived 
with  them,  was  a  kindly,  unselfish  soul  whom  everybody  loved. 
She  was  a  beautiful  dancer,  and  Mr.  Jackson  was  very  fond  of 
dancing  an  Irish  jig  with  her.  It  was  a  joy  to  see  them,  the 
strong  burly  man  and  the  little  creature  of  more  than  eighty 
years  whose  feet  still  tripped  like  a  fairy's  with  all  the  relish 
and  enjoyment  of  youth. 

The  very  guests  of  this  household  were  interesting  and  amus 
ing.  There  was  Jehiel  Railsback,  for  instance.  Jehiel  was  not 
distinguished  for  courage  and  instead  of  going  to  the  front  in 
the  Civil  War,  he  had  appropriately  joined  the  Home  Guard.  A 
story  was  told  that  on  the  occasion  of  Morgan's  raid  in  Indiana 
and  Ohio,  the  Home  Guard  was  called  together  and  the  captain, 
like  Pizarro,  drew  a  line  upon  the  ground  and  said,  "All  who 
are  ready  to  go  with  me  to  meet  the  invader,  step  across  the 


A  FOX  HUNT  39 

line,"  but  no  one  stirred.  He  drew  another  line,  "If  the  foe 
comes  to  Eaton  (a  town  fifteen  miles  away)  all  those  who  will 
go  with  me  to  meet  him  there  step  across  the  line."  Still  no  one 
stirred.  He  drew  another  line,  "If  he  comes  to  the  state  boundary 
(four  miles  away)  all  who  will  go  and  meet  him  there  step  across 
the  line."  Still  there  was  no  answer,  until  Jehiel,  stirred  by 
patriotic  zeal  and  awake  at  last  to  the  need  of  doing  something, 
cried  out,  "Make  it  a  mile,  Captain,  and  I'm  with  you." 

Another  man  who  contributed  largely  to  this  local  colour  was 
a  former  Episcopal  rector,  a  man  of  saintly  life,  universally  be 
loved  by  the  members  of  his  church  and  respected  by  the  com 
munity,  but  abnormally  absent-minded.  He  was  continually 
doing  extraordinary  things.  He  once  conducted  a  funeral  pro 
cession,  not  to  the  cemetery  but  to  the  livery  stable  where  he  kept 
his  horse,  having  forgotten,  while  he  was  driving,  the  mission 
upon  which  he  was  bent.  On  another  occasion,  having  got  his 
notices  mixed,  he  announced  from  the  chancel  that  "Elizabeth 
Starr  had  died  and  that  her  funeral  would  take  place  at  four 
o'clock  every  Tuesday  and  Thursday  afternoon  during  Lent." 


A  FOX  HUNT 

The  average  Hoosier  rural  community  is  very  democratic.  I 
had  not  been  long  in  Indiana  before  I  was  introduced  to  a  char 
acteristic  local  institution,  an  Indiana  fox  hunt.  This  was  not 
a  "meet"  in  the  English  fashion,  with  horses  and  hounds.  There 
was  no  leaping  of  fences  and  hedges  in  a  wild  chase,  but  some 
thing  far  more  plebeian. 

The  day  was  appointed  some  time  ahead;  posters  were  printed 
and  set  up  at  all  the  cross-roads  and  toll-gates  in  the  neighbour 
hood  for  miles  around,  and  notices  published  in  the  local  papers 
giving  the  time,  place,  and  manner  of  conducting  the  hunt. 

A  quarter  section  of  land  was  selected  where  it  was  thought 
that  foxes  could  be  found  and  where  there  was  an  open  field  in 
the  centre.  Sometimes  as  many  as  five  hundred  or  a  thousand 
persons  would  come  together.  Those  who  took  part  in  the  hunt 
were  distributed  somewhat  after  the  fashion  of  an  army  investing 
a  city.  They  were  organised  into  four  "regiments'7  as  nearly  equal 


40  LIFE  IN  INDIANA 

as  possible,  one  of  which  was  to  advance  from  each  point  of  the 
compass.  There  were  no  uniforms,  however,  and  the  "army"  was 
not  at  all  military  in  appearance.  A  "commander-in-chief"  was 
selected  to  conduct  operations,  and  each  of  the  advancing  parties 
was  commanded  by  a  "colonel."  These,  with  a  few  "staff  officers" 
and  "aides"  to  carry  instructions  to  different  parts  of  the  field 
were  the  only  men  on  horseback.  The  rest  were  on  foot.  Each 
man  must  come  provided  with  one  or  more  instruments  for  making 
a  diabolical  din.  Drums,  Indian  whistles,  "toot  horns,"  tin  pans, 
cymbals — all  were  admissible,  provided  they  would  make  noise 
enough,  and  a  small  cannon  was  generally  on  hand  to  give  the 
signal  for  starting.  The  men  were  "deployed  in  skirmish  line" 
from  twenty  to  one  hundred  feet  apart,  and  to  every  dozen  or 
fifteen  men  a  "captain"  was  allotted  to  see  that  they  advanced  in 
regular  order  and  that  the  spaces  between  them  were  as  nearly 
equal  as  possible. 

When  the  cannon  gave  the  signal,  all  started  and  advanced 
slowly  in  converging  lines  toward  the  centre  of  the  section,  mak 
ing  the  greatest  noise  they  could,  screeching,  yelling,  whistling, 
pounding  drums,  and  beating  the  bush.  The  foxes  naturally  re 
treated  toward  the  centre  of  the  quarter  section.  The  men  thus 
came  closer  together  as  they  advanced,  and  when  they  reached 
the  open  space  agreed  upon  they  formed  a  circle  from  which 
there  was  no  chance  of  escape.  Sometimes  they  would  meet  to 
find  they  had  had  their  trouble  for  their  pains  and  to  laugh  at 
each  other  over  the  disappointment.  But  generally  there  were 
three  or  four  foxes  in  the  space  inside  the  ring.  Then  one  was 
selected  as  the  first  to  be  caught  and  some  stout  young  fellow 
volunteered  to  run  him  down.  Round  and  round  the  ring  they 
went,  the  fox  in  front,  the  man  close  behind.  When  the  pursuer 
became  tired,  another  took  his  place  and  then  another  until  at 
last  the  fox  was  caught  by  the  tail  and  his  head  dashed  against 
the  ground. 

Another  fox  was  then  caught  in  the  same  way,  and  after  all 
were  disposed  of  they  were  put  up  for  sale  at  auction  and  struck 
off  to  the  highest  bidder,  some  local  wit  acting  as  auctioneer. 

The  farmers  brought  their  families  and  took  lunch  together  in 
some  neighbouring  grove,  and  in  this  general  reunion  other  im- 


DRAMATIC  INTERESTS  41 

provised  forms  of  amusement  completed  the  entertainment  of  the 
day. 

THE   FAMILY 

As  the  years  went  by  I  absorbed  the  Hoosier  spirit  more  and 
more.  True  we  did  not  spend  all  our  time  in  Indiana.  We 
travelled  a  great  deal  in  Europe,  where  our  daughters  received  a 
good  part  of  their  education.  Since  their  marriages  they  have 
become  widely  separated,  and  they  were  never  so  closely  bound 
as  were  their  parents  to  Indiana.  But  the  family  home  has  still 
strong  attractions  for  them.  They  are  widely  divergent  in  their 
views,  especially  in  their  political  opinions,  but  the  deep  affection 
they  had  for  each  other  in  early  life  seems  only  to  be  strength 
ened  with  the  years,  and  our  lively  controversies  over  the  things 
on  which  we  differ  have  not  in  the  least  impaired  it. 


DRAMATIC   INTERESTS 

We  were  all  very  fond  of  acting.  Caroline,  my  eldest 
daughter,  was  especially  good  in  such  parts  as  Ibsen's  Nora  and 
Shaw's  Candida.  Gwendolen,  the  youngest,  studied  and  acted 
with  Ben  Greet,  and  also  received  dramatic  instruction  in  Paris. 
She  appeared,  as  a  member  of  the  Little  Theatre  Company  of 
Chicago,  in  the  role  of  Andromache  in  "The  Trojan  Women," 
in  various  cities  of  the  country  and  was  offered  at  the  time  of 
her  marriage  the  leading  parts  in  the  Little  Theatre,  then  just 
established,  at  St.  Louis. 

I  loved  to  act,  most  of  all  in  Sheridan's  plays,  and  if  I  can 
credit  such  reliable  judgment  as  that  of  the  patients  of  the  East 
ern  Hospital  for  the  Insane  (just  west  of  Richmond),  I  cannot 
have  been  wholly  unsuccessful,  for  they  declared  that  my  Sir 
Anthony  Absolute  must  have  been  the  work  of  a  professional! 
It  was  not  long  ago  that  I  took  part  in  Lady  Gregory's  "Work 
House  Ward,"  one  of  the  most  screamingly  funny  farces  ever 
written,  and  the  last  time  I  appeared  I  was  rash  enough  to  at 
tempt  Macbeth,  with  my  daughter  Gwendolen  as  Lady  Macbeth, 
on  the  open-air  stage  at  Earlham  College,  on  the  occasion  of  the 
celebration  of  the  tercentenary  of  Shakespeare's  death. 


42  LIFE  IN  INDIANA 

AT   THE   INDIANA   BAR 

The  change  from  practice  in  a  large  city  to  that  of  a  country 
town  was  greater  than  I  had  imagined.  And  yet  it  had  a  certain 
charm  which  soon  compensated  for  the  loss  of  the  excitement  of 
the  metropolis.  My  colleagues  at  the  bar  seemed  at  the  outset 
rather  crude.  They  dressed  very  plainly,  and  many  of  them 
were  quite  too  careless  in  their  personal  appearance.  Very  few 
of  them  had  had  the  advantages  of  a  college  education.  They 
knew,  naturally,  nothing  of  foreign  languages,  except  for  the 
few  words  of  barbarous  Latin  jargon  (often  mispronounced) 
which  they  had  extracted  from  law  books.  Even  the  English 
tongue  was  mingled  with  variations  which  grated  harshly  upon 
the  ears  of  a  newcomer.  When  a  fellow-member  of  the  bar  would 
say  to  me,  "It  looks  like  the  plaintiff  will  win  his  case,"  or  of  a 
man  in  jail,  "He  wants  out,"  I  could  not  at  first  so  far  separate 
the  speaker  from  his  phrase  as  to  believe  that  he  could  really  be 
a  man  of  learning  or  ability.  But  after  daily  contact  with  such 
companions,  after  that  competitive  trial  in  court,  which  is  the 
surest  test  of  what  a  man  is  worth,  I  must  say  that  I  found 
the  average  of  professional  skill  in  this  Indiana  town  quite  as  high 
as  the  average  in  New  York  City.  And  this  was  true  not  at  the 
bar  alone  and  not  merely  of  technical  attainments.  The  man  of 
the  West,  though  he  shows  less  of  the  ornaments  of  learning, 
has  a  better  perspective  of  life  and  the  things  that  are  useful  in 
life  than  his  Eastern  brother.  He  understands  more  thoroughly 
his  country's  history  and  the  nature  of  her  institutions.  He  knows 
the  important  things  in  science  and  English  literature,  and,  most 
important  of  all,  he  has  shrewd  sense,  keen  knowledge  of  human 
nature,  the  power  of  clear  thinking  and  of  fluent  and  forcible, 
if  not  elegant,  speech. 

In  contrast  to  the  mass  of  attorneys  elbowing  each  other  for 
access  to  the  bench  in  the  chambers  of  the  New  York  Supreme 
Court,  the  bar  of  Wayne  County  at  that  time  seemed  like  a  large 
family.  We  all  met  together  in  the  court  room  in  the  morning 
at  eight  o'clock  to  make  up  the  issues  and  dispose  of  other  matters 
preliminary  to  trial.  At  nine  the  jury  was  called.  The  criminal 
trials  came  first  and  then  the  civil  suits,  and  while  the  various 


AT  THE  INDIANA  BAR  43 

lawyers  waited  for  the  calling  of  their  respective  cases,  they  would 
often  spend  the  time  chatting  together  in  one  of  the  adjoining 
rooms.  Here  arguments  waxed  warm  and  jokes  and  stories  cir 
culated,  and  here  strong  friendships  were  formed.  A  great  waste 
of  time  it  seemed  to  me  at  first,  and  so  it  was,  in  part;  yet  it  was 
schooling  like  this  that  trained  such  men  as  Lincoln  to  gauge  so 
well  the  temper  of  the  people  and  to  meet  so  skilfully  the  emer 
gencies  of  many  a  difficult  situation.  I  enjoy  recalling  some  of 
my  brethren  of  the  bar.  There  was  my  partner,  Mr.  Siddall,  short 
of  stature,  clean  shaven,  portly,  venerable,  mopping  his  well- 
rounded  bald  head  when  the  weather  was  hot  with  a  many- 
coloured  silk  bandanna.  He  talked  little,  but  every  word  counted. 
He  never  loaded  his  arguments  with  a  mass  of  authorities;  one 
or  two  cases  right  to  the  point  were  enough.  Sometimes  there  was 
not  a  citation.  But  I  have  rarely  known  his  equal  in  the  power 
of  convincing  the  court  by  well-ordered,  luminous  thought,  ex 
pressed  in  clear,  simple  words.  It  was  he  who  often  presided 
over  our  reunions  in  the  court  room  or  the  library  adjoining.  He 
was  a  good  listener  to  the  tales  and  jests  of  the  others,  whose 
bon  mots  he  rewarded  with  a  benevolent  smile.  Yet  he  had  a 
shrewd  eye  for  the  main  chance  and  had  acquired  a  comfortable 
competence  by  his  profession.  He  was  wise,  not  only  in  winning 
his  clients'  cases,  but  in  presenting  to  them  a  bill  proportioned 
to  the  good  service  he  had  rendered.  Once  when  I  suggested  that 
the  fee  he  proposed  was  too  high,  as  we  had  had  little  to  do,  he 
answered:  "But  think  of  the  responsibility!" 

Then  there  was  Judge  Perry,  who  had  lived  in  the  county  for 
Upwards  of  seventy  years,  and  who,  although  brought  up  in  a 
pioneer  community  amid  the  roughest  surroundings,  bore  the 
unmistakable  lineaments  of  the  old-fashioned  gentleman.  He  had 
a  slender  form;  a  long  neck,  encircled  by  a  high,  black  stock, 
finely  cut  features,  soft  grey  hair,  and  a  resolute  mouth.  His 
cheeks  were  sometimes  inflamed  by  righteous  anger,  and  on  such 
occasions  he  would  use  language  of  the  most  forcible  character, 
but  it  never  degenerated  into  vulgarity.  There  was  no  member 
of  the  bar  who  ever  suspected  Judge  Perry's  absolute  probity  or 
sincerity.  His  regard  for  truth  was  so  great  that  even  his  rhetoric 
had  to  be  exact.  Once  when  addressing  a  jury,  he  began,  "Never 


44  LIFE  IN  INDIANA 

on  God's  green  earth/'  then  looking  out  of  the  window  and  seeing 
there  was  still  snow  upon  the  ground,  he  added,  "or  which  shortly 
will  be  green,  was  a  more  unjustifiable  offence  committed."  He 
had  served  two  terms  as  Judge  of  the  Common  Pleas  and  died 
at  last  at  a  very  ripe  old  age — nearly  ninety — greatly  honoured 
and  loved  by  his  associates.  The  tale  was  told  of  him  that  once 
when  he  bought  a  horse  for  which  he  was  to  give  a  note  in 
payment,  the  seller  asked  for  security.  The  Judge  thereupon 
passed  the  note  to  the  lawyer  sitting  next  him,  who  subscribed 
his  name  and  passed  it  to  the  next,  and  this  was  repeated  until 
it  was  signed  by  all  the  attorneys  in  the  county,  whereupon  the 
man  to  whom  it  was  tendered  declined  absolutely  to  receive  it, 
saying,  "If  all  you  lawyers  are  on  that  note,  how  am  I  ever  to 
collect  it?" 

A  picturesque  figure  that  rises  before  me  as  I  write  is  that  of 
General  Tom  Bennett.  He  had  been  an  officer  in  the  Civil 
War,  was  at  one  time  in  Congress,  and  was  repeatedly  elected 
Mayor  of  Richmond.  He  chiefly  appears  in  my  memory  as  the 
possessor  of  a  lurid  and  most  reprehensible  vocabulary.  After 
his  death  it  was  said  that  his  wife  once  consulted  a  medium 
desiring  a  communication  with  his  spirit  and  that  he  answered 
asking  why  she  was  such  a  damned  fool  as  to  try  to  talk  with  him 
in  that  way.  The  answer  was  so  characteristic  that  many  be 
lieved  the  communication  must  have  been  genuine. 

The  most  "eloquent"  man  among  us  was  Colonel  Bickle.  The 
Colonel  seemed  to  be  the  creature  of  instinct  rather  than  of 
reason.  He  once  told  me  that  when  a  case  was  presented  to  him 
his  conclusion  came  like  a  flash  and  that  no  amount  of  thinking 
ever  made  it  more  clear  to  him.  His  logical  processes  as  set 
forth  in  some  of  his  judicial  opinions  (for  the  Colonel  was  at 
one  time  Judge  of  our  Superior  Court)  were  often  quite  incom 
prehensible  to  others,  and  it  was  undoubtedly  to  such  as  he 
that  the  advice  was  once  given,  "Decide,  but  do  not  give  your 
reasons,  for  although  your  decision  may  be  sound  your  reasons 
never  will  be."  As  a  lawyer  he  was  great  in  one  thing,  in  his 
impassioned  appeals  to  the  jury  in  cases  which  awakened  sym 
pathy.  None  could  paint  more  vividly  in  a  suit  for  criminal 
conversation  the  charms  of  virtue  and  the  sanctity  of  home.  His 


A  SCRIMMAGE  45 

imagery  was  superb  and  his  words  "descending  like  snowflakes 
of  the  winter"  enveloped  the  delighted  imaginations  of  his  hearers. 
John  F.  Kibbey,  the  judge  of  our  circuit  court,  was  quite  dif 
ferent.  He  was  not  fluent  in  speech;  his  charges  to  the  jury, 
always  given  in  writing,  were  concise  to  a  fault,  stating  the  law 
in  very  few  words  and  with  surprising  accuracy.  He  was  a 
man  of  the  most  unimpeachable  integrity,  diligent  and  prompt,  but 
arbitrary  in  his  treatment  of  the  bar,  which  he  disciplined  as  if 
he  were  a  schoolmaster.  He  held  the  most  extreme  Spenserian 
theories  in  politics  and  sociology.  Government  had  no  right, 
he  said,  to  tax  men  for  any  other  purpose  than  the  maintenance  of 
justice.  Public  schools,  post  offices,  tariffs,  national  currency 
were,  however,  iniquities  which  he  cheerfully  supported,  voting 
the  Republican  ticket  at  every  election.  He  always  believed  in 
woman's  suffrage,  he  once  told  me,  until  he  passed  the  threshold 
of  the  hall  of  a  woman's  suffrage  convention,  when  he  became 
disgusted  with  the  "cause"  until  he  was  out  in  the  street  again. 
Indeed,  he  always  took  the  opposite  side  on  everything,  and  those 
at  the  bar  who  were  shrewdest  used  to  find  that  the  best  way  to 
get  a  decision  from  him  was  to  say  as  little  as  possible  and  let 
him  argue  the  case  with  the  opposite  counsel.  He  had  a  way 
(not  to  be  imitated  by  every  judge)  of  talking  to  the  lawyers 
about  their  cases  out  of  court,  but  it  never  gave  those  of  us  who 
knew  him  the  least  anxiety  to  find  the  judge  talking  with  the 
lawyer  on  the  other  side,  for  we  well  knew  that  the  harder  the 
man  argued,  trying  to  convince  him,  the  less  likely  he  was  to 
succeed. 

A    SCRIMMAGE 

At  one  time  I  was  connected  with  a  closely  contested  case  in 
which  Thomas  J.  Study  was  associated  with  Judge  Peele  on  the 
other  side.  We  had  been  crowding  them  pretty  closely,  and 
they  were  becoming  irritated.  On  one  occasion  I  entered  Judge 
Peele's  office  in  order  to  give  notice  of  the  taking  of  some  addi 
tional  depositions.  Study  was  there  and  in  a  very  bad  humour. 
After  I  had  served  the  papers  and  was  about  to  leave,  he  assailed 
me  with  very  opprobrious  epithets,  but  as  they  had  no  reference 
to  anything  in  particular  I  concluded  to  consider  them  mere 


46  LIFE  IN  INDIANA 

evidence  of  his  disapproval,  and  I  walked  away  without  answer 
ing.  He  followed  me  to  the  door,  saying,  "I  want  to  know 
why  you  got  the  witnesses  in  this  case  to  swear  to  such  and  such 
facts."  This  made  me  angry.  I  turned  back  on  him,  saying, 
"If  you  say  that  I  got  the  witnesses  in  this  or  any  other  case  to 
testify  what  was  not  true,  you  are  an  infernal  liar."  On  a  table 
close  beside  him  was  a  notary's  seal  weighing  several  pounds.  He 
started  to  reach  for  it.  I  knew  that  I  must  either  run  or  seize 
him  before  he  took  it.  I  did  not  want  to  run,  so  I  grabbed 
him.  I  got  my  right  arm  around  his  neck  and  he  got  his  left 
arm  around  mine  and  we  rolled  over  on  the  floor  together.  First 
I  was  on  top,  then  he  was,  and  then  you  couldn't  tell  which  one 
was.  Finally  we  got  in  a  position  side  by  side,  each  of  us 
supporting  himself  on  the  floor  by  one  hand.  If  I  lifted  my  hand 
to  hit  him  I  would  fall  under  him,  and  he  would  do  the  same 
if  he  tried  to  strike  me;  so  it  got  to  be  somewhat  like  trench 
warfare — neither  party  could  attack  except  at  a  great  disadvan 
tage,  and  the  situation  struck  me  as  so  irresistibly  funny  that  I 
broke  out  laughing.  The  chairs  had  been  scattered  about  the 
room  in  the  melee,  and  Judge  Peele  and  two  or  three  others 
who  were  there  now  seized  us  by  our  legs  and  pulled  us  apart, 
whereupon  I  walked  away. 

There  was  a  peculiar  aftermath.  Study  was  arrested  by  the 
police  for  assault  and  battery.  The  trial  was  set  before  the 
Mayor,  and  I  was  subpoenaed  as  a  witness.  We  had  had  our 
fight;  I  didn't  feel  the  least  resentment  and  I  didn't  want  to 
testify  against  him.  I  had  a  demurrer  to  argue  that  after 
noon  before  Judge  Kibbey.  So  long  as  I  kept  my  feet  arguing 
that  demurr&r  I  knew  nobody  could  take  me  away  on  an  attach 
ment  and  compel  me  to  appear  before  the  Mayor.  I  told  the 
opposing  counsel  of  my  predicament  and  that  I  expected  to  argue 
the  case  at  length.  He  made  no  objection.  It  was  a  case  which 
ordinarily  would  have  taken  fifteen  minutes,  but  I  kept  at  it  for 
hours,  citing  all  the  cases  on  both  sides  and  reading  them  at  length 
and  then  starting  out  from  a  new  point  of  view.  I  think  Judge 
Kibbey  knew  what  I  was  up  to,  but  he  said  nothing  and  bore 
it  patiently.  Then  I  saw  two  policemen  come  into  the  court 
room.  I  knew  they  had  a  warrant  for  me,  but  they  couldn't 


RAILROAD  PRACTICE  47 

serve  it  while  I  was  on  my  feet.  I  took  a  fresh  start,  kept  it  up 
most  of  the  afternoon,  and  did  not  stop  until  I  saw  Study  and  his 
counsel  coming  into  the  room.  Then  I  knew  the  trial  was  over 
and  desisted. 

I  heard  afterwards  what  happened  at  the  Mayor's  court. 
Henry  U.  Johnson  defended  Study.  Judge  Peele  was  the  first 
witness  for  the  prosecution.  He  testified  that  "these  two  gentle 
men  had  some  words  in  his  office  and  came  together  so  quickly 
that  no  one  could  ever  tell  who  struck  the  first  blow." 

"I  will  ask  you,  Judge  Peele/'  said  Johnson,  "if  from  what  you 
saw  it  is  not  your  judgment  that  each  of  these  gentlemen  was 
endeavouring  to  prevent  the  other  from  committing  a  breach 
of  the  peace?" 

"That  was  exactly  it,"  said  Judge  Peele,  and  Study  was 
acquitted. 

It  is  curious  how  a  little  scrap  of  this  kind  clears  the  air.  Study 
and  I  remained  fast  friends  from  that  time  until  the  day  of  his 
death.  He  was  sometimes  rough  in  his  behaviour,  but  I  have 
found  from  personal  experience  that  he  had  a  very  kind  heart. 

RAILROAD   PRACTICE 

While  the  railroad  business  in  the  firm  of  Siddall  and  Foulke 
constituted  only  a  part  of  our  general  practice,  it  was  in  the 
main  very  agreeable  and  satisfactory.  Our  work  was  much  the 
same  as  that  of  counsel  at  the  English  bar,  the  cases  being  briefed 
by  claim  agents  and  other  experts  while  we  had  charge  of  the 
proceedings  in  court  and  of  the  various  law  questions  which  arose 
there.  It  had  formerly  been  the  policy  of  the  railroad  company 
to  contest  nearly  all  these  cases,  but  the  result  was  a  series  of 
large  judgments  for  damages  and  much  expensive  litigation.  This 
policy  was  changed  about  the  time  I  entered  the  firm.  The  great 
majority  of  the  cases  were  compromised.  Indeed,  we  never  fought 
a  case  unless  we  were  reasonably  sure  of  obtaining  a  judgment. 
In  the  long  run  a  great  deal  of  money  was  thus  saved,  and  much 
of  the  violent  prejudice  which  had  existed  in  this  farming  com 
munity  against  railroads  was  removed.  Indeed,  so  successful  was 
this  plan  that  during  the  last  three  years  of  practice  I  never  had 


48  LIFE  IN  INDIANA 

occasion  to  appeal  a  single  case  to  the  Supreme  Court.  We  either 
settled  the  controversy  or  got  a  verdict  in  the  court  below.  The 
juries  became  remarkably  liberal  to  the  company  after  it  was 
known  that  we  tried  to  treat  litigants  fairly.  At  Newcastle,  in 
the  adjoining  county  of  Henry,  we  were  almost  uniformly  suc 
cessful,  while  another  railroad  company  in  the  same  county  was 
continually  compelled  to  pay  heavy  damages. 

There  is  one  delightful  memory  of  the  old  days  when  Siddall 
and  Foulke  had  their  quiet  rooms  over  the  First  National  Bank. 
It  was  the  custom  of  the  firm  on  Saturday  afternoons  when  the 
week's  business  had  been  disposed  of,  to  lock  the  doors  of  the 
office,  take  out  a  bottle  of  Werk's  Dry  Catawba  and,  under  its 
mellowing  influence,  sometimes  with  an  invited  guest  but  more 
frequently  alone,  to  indulge  in  a  general  philosophic  review  of  the 
past  week's  experiences  and  of  the  world  in  general. 

Before  many  years,  however,  Mr.  Siddall,  whose  health  was 
beginning  to  fail,  decided  to  retire  from  practice.  I  thereupon 
formed  a  partnership  with  John  L.  Rupe,  which  lasted  until 
1885  under  the  firm  name  of  Foulke  and  Rupe.  In  both  these 
associations  there  was  at  all  times  the  utmost  harmony  between 
the  members  of  the  firm. 

While  I  was  in  this  later  partnership  I  was  elected  to  the 
State  Senate,  where  I  served  four  years,  and  during  this  period 
Mr.  Rupe  was  elected  mayor  of  Richmond.  Neither  of  these 
positions,  however,  interfered  very  seriously  with  our  law  practice. 
In  our  respective  campaigns  each  of  us  gave  the  other  every 
possible  support.  Indeed,  my  election  to  the  Senate  was  mainly 
due  to  Mr.  Rupe,  as  I  had  been  taken  ill  during  the  canvass.  He 
managed  my  interests  better  than  I  could  have  done  myself. 


PERSONAL   ASSOCIATIONS 

I  was  also  quite  intimate  with  Charles  H.  Burchenal,  the  most 
learned  lawyer  at  our  bar  and  a  very  lovable  and  genial  man  to 
those  who  knew  him  well.  I  was  opposed  to  him  in  many  cases. 
One  of  these  was  Horney  vs.  Patterson,  a  suit  for  partnership 
accounting  involving  a  vast  amount  of  detail.  The  Hon.  Silas 
Colgrove,  a  judge  from  the  neighbouring  town  of  Winchester, 


PERSONAL  ASSOCIATIONS  49 

had  been  called  in  to  try  the  case.  It  dragged  its  weary  length 
through  weeks  and  months.  The  hot  days  of  summer  were 
approaching,  we  were  pretty  well  worn  out,  and  finally,  when 
Judge  Colgrove  took  to  his  bed,  we  concluded  to  postpone  the 
case  until  the  following  fall.  Meanwhile  Burchenal  and  I  deter 
mined  to  spend  the  summer  together  in  Europe,  where  we  had 
a  beautiful  time.  On  our  return  we  took  up  "Horney  vs.  Pat 
terson"  again,  contesting  every  point  with  pertinacity  for  a 
month  or  two  longer.  The  case  threatened  to  become  another 
Jarndyce  and  Jarndyce,  where  the  costs  and  fees  ate  up  the 
entire  amount  in  the  controversy,  but  we  finally  agreed  upon  a 
compromise  which  prevented  the  total  loss  of  everything  at  issue. 
We  did  not  wish  to  exemplify  too  literally  Lord  Brougham's  defi 
nition  of  the  advocate,  "A  learned  gentleman  who  rescues  your 
property  from  the  hands  of  your  adversary  and  keeps  it  him 
self." 

Burchenal  and  I  were  together  a  great  deal  in  Richmond. 
Every  day  or  two  after  our  trials  in  court  we  would  ride  out 
into  the  country.  Burchenal  rode  a  pony  named  Billy,  an  obsti 
nate  little  beast  who  could  run  like  the  wind,  but  did  not 
always  run  the  way  his  rider  wished.  Once  on  one  of  the  by 
roads  south  of  Richmond  we  crossed  a  mill  race  on  a  ramshackle 
wooden  bridge,  the  planks  of  which  extended  beyond  the  beams 
underneath.  Billy  insisted  on  going  to  the  extreme  edge  of  the 
planks,  which  began  to  tilt  and  frightened  the  little  beast  till  he 
plunged  madly  into  the  water.  It  was  a  comical  sight  to  see 
pony  and  rider  swimming  side  by  side  for  the  shore.  When 
Burchenal  mounted  again,  his  stovepipe  hat  was  more  than  usu 
ally  glossy,  and  his  dripping  raiment  left  its  marks  upon  the 
road.  The  pony  bounded  away  under  the  whip,  a  fresh  stroke 
at  every  bound,  while  I  followed,  trying  to  overtake  my  com 
panion,  but  I  was  so  convulsed  with  laughter  that  for  a  mile  or 
two  I  failed.  At  last  I  caught  up  and  told  him  how  funny  it 
all  was,  to  which  he  answered  drily  that  "he  had  not  been  in  a 
position  to  enjoy  it." 

In  addition  to  our  own  bar,  lawyers  from  other  parts  of  the 
state  took  part  in  our  litigations.  Among  these  was  Benjamin 
Harrison,  who,  after  he  had  retired  from  the  Presidency,  appeared 


So  LIFE  IN  INDIANA 

as  counsel  of  the  contestant  in  an  important  will  case.  This  was 
some  years  after  I  had  withdrawn  from  practice.  The  trial  was 
protracted  to  a  great  length.  It  began  early  in  January,  1895, 
and  continued  until  May. 

While  the  trial  was  going  on  I  left  home,  travelled  for  two 
or  three  months  in  Cuba,  Yucatan  and  Mexico,  and  returned 
to  find  it  still  dragging  its  slow  length  along. 

The  hotels  in  Richmond  were  very  poor;  a  number  of  us 
therefore  invited  General  Harrison  and  Mr.  Winter,  the  asso 
ciate  counsel,  to  dinner  once  a  week  during  the  trial.  His  regu 
lar  evening  at  our  house  was  Friday,  and  I  recall  a  remark  he 
made  on  one  of  these  occasions  shortly  before  his  argument:  "The 
people  are  expecting  that  after  this  long  trial  we  are  going  to 
make  brilliant  arguments.  You  might  as  well  expect  a  horse  to 
prance  and  show  his  paces  after  he  has  been  dragging  a  gun 
carriage  to  the  top  of  Pike's  Peak." 

Early  in  May  he  made  the  concluding  argument  for  the  con 
testants.  His  speech  occupied  the  whole  of  one  day.  The  court 
room  was  densely  packed,  many  being  unable  to  obtain  admis 
sion.  He  spoke  at  the  outset  of  the  impossibility  of  bringing 
in  review  the  entire  mass  of  testimony,  the  hearing  of  which  had 
covered  a  period  of  more  than  four  months.  He  would  confine 
himself,  he  said,  to  a  consideration  of  the  main  points,  the  few 
bold  headlands  that  projected  from  the  great  line  of  testimony. 
Then  he  considered  one  after  another  the  most  vital  facts  show 
ing  that  the  testator  had  not  the  capacity  to  make  a  will. 

The  concluding  passages  of  his  address  were  very  eloquent, 
but  they  were  delivered  to  the  jury  in  a  low  tone  of  voice  and 
were  not  heard  by  the  great  mass  of  those  who  thronged  the  court 
room.  I  have  always  considered  this  the  finest  jury  address  to 
which  I  ever  listened,  and  I  have  heard  the  speeches  in  a  good 
many  celebrated  cases.  It  was  not  so  much  a  passionate  appeal 
as  a  convincing,  logical  demonstration  of  the  highest  kind.  He 
won  his  case.  The  jury  decided  that  the  will  was  invalid. 

General  Harrison  has  been  criticised  as  cold  and  unsympa 
thetic,  but  he  was  powerful,  if  not  passionate,  in  argument.  He 
showed  great  tact  in  the  management  of  this  case  and  in  his 
colloquies  with  counsel  upon  the  other  side.  When  one  of  these 


REFLECTIONS  5* 

criticised  the  fact  that  an  ex-president  had  been  brought  into  the 
trial  for  the  purpose  of  impressing  the  jury,  his  reply  was:  "There 
is  no  ex-president  here,  but  simply  a  member  of  the  Indiana  bar 
who  intends  to  treat  his  associates  with  courtesy  and  respect  and 
to  exact  the  same  treatment  from  them." 


RETIREMENT   FROM   PRACTICE 

In  1885,  shortly  after  my  second  session  in  the  Indiana  Senate, 
I  had  so  many  personal  interests  that  required  attention  that  I 
determined  to  withdraw  from  general  practice.  The  firm  of 
Foulke  and  Rupe  was  thereupon  dissolved,  and  Mr.  Burchenal 
entered  into  partnership  with  Mr.  Rupe  in  my  place. 


REFLECTIONS 

No  man  ever  enjoyed  the  practice  of  law  more  than  I  did, 
especially  in  connection  with  jury  trials.  I  never  found  any 
thing  more  interesting  than  the  marshalling  of  evidence,  the 
search  for  decisions  in  point,  the  examination  and  cross-examina 
tion  of  witnesses,  the  laying  of  plans  to  circumvent  the  adver 
sary,  and,  best  of  all,  the  preparation  and  delivery  of  the  final 
appeal  to  the  "twelve  good  men  and  true." 

To  talk  to  a  jury  where  there  was  a  fair  chance  to  win  was 
always  the  keenest  of  pleasures.  For  many  years  I  used  to  be 
a  little  nervous  just  before  rising  to  speak,  but  at  last  this  passed 
away,  and  it  was  all  unalloyed  delight.  The  problem  was  not 
merely  to  set  forth  the  law  and  the  evidence  in  orderly  sequence, 
but  also  to  awaken  those  impulses  of  human  nature  which  often 
play  so  important  a  part  in  securing  verdicts. 

Sometimes  the  court  used  to  limit  our  speeches  to  a  certain 
number  of  minutes  or  hours — sometimes  we  were  given  a  free 
hand.  I  always  liked  best  to  be  limited,  for  although  it  might 
cripple  the  argument,  it  generally  embarrassed  the  lawyer  on  the 
other  side  a  good  deal  more.  I  could  talk  faster  and  get  more 
words  and  possibly  ideas  into  a  given  number  of  minutes  than  any 
other  man  at  the  Richmond  bar,  except  Henry  U.  Johnson.  These 
things  are  always  comparative.  Better  omit  half  your  argument  if 


52  LIFE  IN  INDIANA 

your  adversary  has  to  leave  out  three-fourths  of  his.  Better  go 
into  a  trial  with  half  your  witnesses  away,  if  you  have  enough 
to  make  out  your  case,  provided  the  other  side  must  suffer  a  still 
greater  loss.  It  is  like  a  battle;  you  should  strike  if  only  half 
prepared  rather  than  wait  till  the  enemy  receives  still  greater 
reinforcements. 

For  the  practice  of  this  profession  there  is  one  kind  of  knowl 
edge  almost  as  important  as  the  knowledge  of  the  statutes  and 
decisions.  This  is  a  knowledge  of  men,  of  the  motives  which 
govern  them  and  their  probable  conduct  in  a  given  emergency. 
It  cannot  be  learned  from  any  printed  page.  Shakespeare  may 
lay  bare  the  hidden  mainsprings  of  human  action,  Tolstoi  may 
dissect  character  until  we  are  astonished  and  shocked  at  the 
faithfulness  of  the  portrait,  but  it  is  a  certain  native  intuition 
combined  with  practical  experience  which  gives  us  our  knowledge 
of  men.  I  have  known  lawyers  of  talent  who  have  lost  their 
cases  from  this  inability  to  understand  the  feelings  and  motives 
of  others. 

An  advocate  perhaps  prides  himself  upon  his  skill  in  cross- 
examination.  He  can  throw  the  witness  into  confusion,  he  can 
extract  contradictions  and  lay  bare  inconsistencies;  yet  some 
times  this  very  power  is  fatal  to  his  cause.  It  is  one  of  the  best 
traits  of  human  nature  that  it  takes  the  part  of  the  helpless  and 
unfortunate,  and  whenever  the  skill  of  the  lawyer  goes  beyond 
what  the  jury  believes  to  be  fair,  his  triumph  as  a  cross-examiner 
may  lead  to  a  verdict  for  the  other  side.  To  browbeat  a  woman 
upon  the  witness  stand  is  the  most  fatal  of  all  mistakes. 

The  tendency  to  cross-examine  too  much  is,  I  think,  a  blunder 
more  common  than  any  other.  Many  lawyers  ask  questions  in 
regard  to  everything  they  can  think  of  and  often  with  little  regard 
to  the  probable  answers.  In  the  neighbouring  county  of  Henry 
they  used  to  say  of  one  of  their  number,  "All  you  need  do  is  to 
ask  a  witness  his  name,  age  and  residence,  then  turn  him  over 
to  Grose  for  cross-examination  and  your  case  will  be  proved." 

A  lawyer  should  study  his  jury  carefully.  He  must  neither 
underrate  nor  overrate  their  intelligence.  He  can  nearly  always 
count  upon  their  honesty.  The  average  man,  where  he  has  no 
particular  interest  or  prejudice  of  his  own,  will  try  to  do  what 


REFLECTIONS  53 

he  thinks  is  right.  A  purely  technical  appeal  to  a  jury  against 
natural  justice  will  rarely  win.  An  appeal  to  prejudice  is  some 
times  more  successful.  Verdicts  have  often  been  determined  by 
matters  quite  outside  the  domain  of  legal  evidence.  One  jury 
man  who  had  stood  out  long  against  his  eleven  obstinate  com 
panions  gave  as  a  reason  that  he  never  would  find  in  favour  of 
a  man  who  carried  a  gold-headed  cane! 

In  most  cases  where  a  mistake  is  made  in  a  verdict  it  is 
caused  by  sympathy  or  by  attempts  to  do  right  in  the  face  of 
the  law.  Where  usury  involves  the  loss  of  principal  and 
interest,  juries  are  slow  to  find  that  the  contract  has  been 
usurious.  In  suits  for  damages  resulting  from  the  proved  care 
lessness  of  the  defendant  it  is  hard  to  get  a  jury  to  find  that 
the  negligence  of  the  plaintiff  contributed  to  the  injury  so  as  to 
bar  his  recovery.  Where  there  has  been  mutual  fault  they  will 
try  to  divide  the  damages,  and  every  fact  will  be  strained  in 
favour  of  the  unfortunate. 

This  brings  me  to  another  point.  In  the  argument  of  a  case 
is  it  better  to  present  in  detail  and  argue  elaborately  every 
question,  or  is  it  better  to  seize  the  strong  points  of  the  con 
troversy  and  urge  these  alone?  Rufus  Choate  used  to  say  that 
he  had  tried  juries  so  often  and  had  found  them  so  uncertain 
that  he  would  leave  nothing  unargued.  Such  men  as  Webster 
and  Erskine,  on  the  other  hand,  would  take  the  strong  points 
only,  believing  that  to  divert  the  mind  of  the  jury  to  less  impor 
tant  subjects  tended  to  confuse  and  embarrass  them  in  regard  to 
the  leading  issues.  Which  is  the  better  course?  I  should  say 
that  this  depends  largely  upon  what  you  know  of  your  case  and 
what  you  know  of  your  jury.  If  you  are  satisfied  that  you  can 
make  the  jury  see  what  are  the  vital  questions,  it  is  wiser  to 
throw  away  immaterial  or  subordinate  things  which  can  only 
darken  counsel.  But  otherwise  you  cannot  safely  neglect  details. 
The  best  lawyer  will  never  be  over-confident  of  success  and 
will  never  despair  amid  reverses.  There  are  some  antagonists 
who  are  not  dangerous  until  after  they  have  suffered  a  defeat. 
It  is  better  to  be  like  these  than  like  him  who  enters  the  battle 
with  perfect  confidence  and  after  the  first  reverse  lays  down  his 
arms.  The  time  to  end  a  case  is  after  you  have  won  something, 


54  LIFE  IN  INDIANA 

not  when  you  have  lost.    The  most  dangerous  of  all  antagonists 
is  the  one  who  does  not  know  when  he  is  beaten. 

Such  are  the  impressions  which  some  fifteen  years  of  active 
practice  have  left  with  me.  But  the  concluding  question  re 
mains.  Is  it  well  to  advise  a  young  man  to  follow  this  profes 
sion?  It  certainly  is  an  inspiring  career.  It  not  only  gives  great 
prizes  of  its  own,  but  it  leads  naturally  into  other  avenues  of  pub 
lic  life.  If  the  question  be  one  of  mere  personal  advantage,  the 
reasons  for  it  will  often  be  conclusive.  But  from  the  point  of 
view  of  human  welfare,  there  are  other  careers  which  are  more 
useful.  There  will  always  be  lawyers  enough  for  the  needs  of 
justice.  The  law  is  a  necessary  conservative  power,  but  the  great 
est  advances  of  humanity  have  been  made  in  other  fields — in 
medicine,  in  engineering,  in  scientific  and  industrial  effort.  The 
most  learned  lawyer  at  our  bar  once  said  to  me:  "After  our  days 
are  over  how  little  we  shall  have  to  show  for  them!  Of  what 
importance  to  the  world  is  it  whether  Smith  or  Jones  wins  this 
case  or  that?  We  are  not  like  inventors  or  architects  or  artists 
or  writers,  who  leave  permanent  memorials  behind  them.  All  we 
have  done  is  just  to  help  hold  things  together."  Legislation  in 
deed  may  be  constructive  and,  once  in  a  century,  some  great 
jurist  like  Chief  Justice  Marshall  may  give  vitality  to  our  insti 
tutions  by  his  interpretations  of  the  fundamental  law,  yet  in  the 
ordinary  growth  of  jurisprudence  there  is  often  as  much  harm  as 
good.  Complexities,  delays,  and  the  frequent  miscarriage  of 
justice  have  crept  in  with  the  very  effort  to  secure  greater  cer 
tainty  and  more  perfect  equity.  And  it  would  be  hard  to  find 
(unless  it  be  in  theology)  any  profession  that  now  lags  so  far 
behind  the  general  advance  in  science  and  knowledge  as  the  pro 
fession  of  the  law. 


CHAPTER  III 

INDIANA  ASSOCIATIONS,  JULIAN,   RILEY,   ETC. 

WHEN  from  tormenting  cares  I  steal  away 

To  haunt  the  quiet  river-side ;  to  hear 
The  murmur  of  the  stream ;  to  note  the  play 

Of  quivering  foliage  mirrored  sharp  and  clear 
Upon  its  tranquil  breast;  to  see  the  boys 

Plunge  in  the  swimming  hole ;  to  thread  the  lanes 
Close  thicketed,  and  share  the  wanton  joys 

Of  forest  birds;  to  watch  the  heavy  wains 
Creaking  and  toiling  through  the  shallow  ford ; 

To  mark  the  cricket's  chirp  and  drone  of  bee, 
Or  sit  a  welcome  guest  at  the  farmer's  board, 

Hearing  quaint  talk  and  rude  philosophy; 
Riley,  thy  music  comes,  a  soft  refrain, 
And  blends  with  all  in  one  harmonious  strain. 

— To  James  Whitcomb  Riley. 
See  infra,  p.  63. 

THE   TUESDAY   CLUB 

Indiana  soil,  as  we  have  already  seen,  has  been  peculiarly 
fertile  for  the  growth  of  all  sorts  of  literary,  dramatic  and 
art  associations.  There  was  in  Richmond  a  literary  society 
known  as  the  Tuesday  Club  which  lived  more  than  a  score 
of  years.  It  was  organised  on  the  same  plan  as  that  of  the 
Liberal  Club  in  New  York.  A  paper  was  read  or  an  address 
delivered  by  a  member  or  by  a  guest.  Then  the  subject  was 
thrown  open  to  discussion,  and  the  speaker  had  the  right  to  close 
the  debate.  Some  of  these  papers  were  of  marked  ability.  Albert 
J.  Beveridge,  David  Starr  Jordan,  Felix  Adler,  Richard  H.  Dana, 
Lucius  B.  Swift,  George  W.  Julian  and  others  delivered  addresses 
or  took  part  in  the  debates,  which  were  always  lively  and  enter 
taining,  though  the  views  expressed  were  not  so  radical  as  those 
of  the  members  of  the  Liberal  Club. 

55 


56       INDIANA  ASSOCIATIONS,  JULIAN,  RILEY,  ETC. 

GEORGE   W.   JULIAN 

One  of  our  most  animated  discussions  was  in  the  winter  of 
1895-96,  when  George  W.  Julian,  an  early  abolitionist  and  at  one 
time  a  member  of  Congress  from  our  district  (then  known  as  "the 
old  burnt  district"),  read  a  paper  on  Charles  Sumner.  He  and 
Sumner  had  been  close  friends,  and  he  spoke  bitterly  of  Sumner's 
deposition  from  the  chairmanship  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign 
Relations  during  Grant's  administration.  He  especially  referred 
to  the  indignity  offered  to  Sumner  by  depriving  him  of  a  place 
on  any  leading  committee  and  giving  him  a  merely  subordinate 
position  on  one  which  was  wholly  unimportant.  I  took  issue  with 
Mr.  Julian  upon  this  subject,  recalling  Mr.  Sumner's  impossible 
position  in  respect  to  England,  he  having  insisted  that  the  British 
empire  ought  to  be  excluded  entirely  from  the  American  con 
tinent.1 

I  showed  the  necessity  of  having  the  administration  and  the 
Senate  in  accord  upon  our  foreign  policy,  and  I  also  reminded 
Mr.  Julian  that  Sumner  had  been  offered  and  had  declined  the 
chairmanship  of  the  Committee  on  Elections,  which  afterwards 
became,  under  the  direction  of  our  war  governor,  Oliver  P.  Mor- 

1  Mr.  Julian  expressed  his  doubt  as  to  the  authenticity  of  the  memo 
randum  in  which  Sumner  had  insisted  on  this  exclusion.  I  accordingly 
enquired  as  to  this  of  J.  C.  Bancroft  Davis,  the  most  prominent  par 
ticipant  in  the  negotiations  regarding  the  Alabama  claims  and  received 
from  him  the  following  reply: 

WASHINGTON,  D.  C.,  Feb.  20,  1896. 
WILLIAM  DUDLEY  FOULKE,  ESQ. 
DEAR  SIR:— 

Your  letter  of  the  I7th  is  received  and  I  hasten  to  answer  your 
enquiries. 

On  the  64th,  65th  and  66th  pages  of  "Mr.  Fish  and  the  Alabama 
Claims" — the  sketch  to  which  you  refer — I  say:  "Matters  were  now 
sufficiently  advanced  to  warrant  the  Secretary  (Mr.  Fish)  in  consulting 
the  Chairman  of  the  Senate  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  and  on 
the  I5th  of  January  he  went  to  Mr.  Sumner's  house  by  appointment. 
The  Senator  gave  no  answer  on  that  day,  but  on  the  I7th  of  January 
sent  the  following  memorandum  in  writing  to  Mr.  Fish : 

First.  The  idea  of  Sir  John  Rose  is  that  all  questions  and  causes 
of  irritation  between  England  and  the  United  States  should  be  re- 


GEORGE  W.  JULIAN  57 

ton,  the  leading  committee  in  the  Senate.  We  had  quite  a  lively 
argument  upon  the  question. 

On  the  following  morning  (Mr.  Julian  was  my  guest  at  the 
time)  we  received  the  startling  news  of  President  Cleveland's 
message  on  the  Venezuela  question,  amounting  almost  to  a  chal 
lenge  of  war  to  the  British  Empire,  which  had  declined  to  arbi 
trate  the  matter.  The  message  made  a  deep  impression  upon  us. 
Mr.  Julian,  then  a  very  old  man,  was  lying  upon  a  couch;  we 
discussed  point  by  point  the  various  questions  involved.  The 
danger  of  war  appeared  extremely  grave.  We  had  declared 
our  policy  and  must  abide  by  it.  The  Monroe  Doctrine,  necessary 
to  our  national  security,  forbade  the  forcible  acquisition  of  new 
territory  in  America  by  a  European  power.  There  was  strong 
reason  to  believe  that  England  was  forcibly  encroaching  upon 
the  territory  of  Venezuela.  We  were  bound  to  see  that  this  was 
not  done.  If  England  persisted  that  meant  war,  and  it  would  be 
very  difficult  for  her  to  recede.  We  might  well  ask  ourselves 
whether  this  question  of  a  boundary  in  South  America  was  worth 
the  lives  and  treasure  such  a  war  would  cost.  Indeed,  except  for 
the  principle  involved,  it  would  have  no  such  value,  but  we  were 

moved  absolutely  and  for  ever  that  we  may  be  at  peace  really  and 
good  neighbours,  and  to  this  end  all  points  of  differences  should  be 
considered  together.  Nothing  could  be  better  than  this  initial  idea. 
It  should  be  the  starting  point. 

Second.  The  greatest  trouble,  if  not  peril,  being  a  constant  source 
of  anxiety  and  disturbance,  is  from  Fenianism,  which  is  excited  by  the 
proximity  of  the  British  flag  in  Canada.  Therefore  the  withdrawal  of 
the  British  flag  can  not  be  abandoned  as  a  condition  or  preliminary  of 
such  a  settlement  as  is  now  proposed.  To  make  the  settlement  com 
plete,  the  withdrawal  should  be  from  this  hemisphere,  including  prov 
inces  and  islands. 

Third.  No  proposition  for  a  joint  commission  can  be  accepted  unless 
the  terms  of  submission  are  such  as  to  leave  no  reasonable  doubt  of 
a  favourable  result.  There  must  not  be  another  failure. 

Fourth.  A  discrimination  in  favour  of  claims  arising  from  the 
depredations  of  any  particular  ship  will  dishonour  the  claims  arising 
from  the  depredations  of  other  ships,  which  the  American  Govern 
ment  can  not  afford  to  do ;  nor  should  the  English  Government  expect 
it,  if  they  would  sincerely  remove  all  occasions  of  difference. 

C.  S." 


58       INDIANA  ASSOCIATIONS,  JULIAN,  RILEY,  ETC. 

the  children  of  ancestors  who  had  maintained  a  desolating  strug 
gle  for  eight  years  with  the  same  adversary  rather  than  submit 
to  a  vicious  principle.     If  we  could  be  sure  of  our  constancy 
throughout  this  struggle,  the  final  result  would  not  be  doubtful. 
Mr.  Julian  and  I  came  to  the  conclusion  that  the  principle  for 
"which  Mr.  Cleveland  contended  was  right  and  that  he  was  en 
titled  to  the  unquestioning  support  of  the  American  people. 
The  outcome  was  indeed  a  happy  one.     The  British  Govern- 

You  say  that  the  authenticity  of  this  memorandum  is  now  questioned, 
but  not  by  yourself.  In  reply  I  freely  make  the  following  statement 
as  to  my  own  sources  of  knowledge: 

On  the  15th  day  of  January,  1871,  it  came  to  my  knowledge  that 
Mr.  Fish  had  gone  to  Mr.  Sumner's  house.  I  saw  him  on  his  return 
and  heard  from  his  lips  what  had  taken  place  there.  I  knew  on  the 
I7th  that  Mr.  Fish  had  received  the  memorandum.  I  saw  that  paper 
soon  after  its  receipt,  and  recognised  it  as  being  in  the  handwriting 
of  Mr.  Sumner,  with  which  I  was  familiar.  All  the  statements  which 
I  made  on  this  subject  in  the  sketch  called  "Mr.  Fish  and  the  Alabama 
Claims"  were  made  from  personal  knowledge,  including  those  concern 
ing  the  text  of  the  memorandum,  its  date,  and  the  initials  of  Mr. 
Sumner. 

You  also  ask  whether  the  original  of  the  memorandum  is  in  exist 
ence  and  where  it  is  to  be  found. 

In  reply  I  beg  to  say  that  the  original  of  Mr.  Sumner's  memoran 
dum  is,  I  presume,  among  the  many  and  valuable  papers  of  Mr.  Fish 
in  the  hands  of  his  literary  executors.  I  last  saw  it  at  his  country 
home,  at  Garrison's,  in  the  summer  of  1893,  during  his  lifetime.  I  was 
then  engaged  in  the  preparation  of  "Mr.  Fish  and  the  Alabama  Claims," 
which  appeared  in  the  autumn  of  that  year. 

The  memorandum  referred  to  was  first  made  public  in  a  letter  from 
me  which  appeared  in  the  New  York  Herald,  January  4,  1878.  That 
letter  was  written  with  the  knowledge  and  permission  of  Mr.  Fish. 
He  not  only  read  it  carefully  before  publication,  but  he  had  it  re 
printed  in  pamphlet  form,  circulated  the  reprint  among  his  friends,  and 
deposited  it  in  many  public  libraries.  He  would  not  have  done  this 
had  he  entertained  any  doubt  of  its  authenticity.  The  active  partici 
pation  of  so  honourable,  so  upright  and  so  truthful  a  man  in  making 
public  and  in  circulating  the  memorandum  is  convincing  proof  that  he 
regarded  it  as  authentic  and  that  it  was  so. 

On  Mr.  Sumner's  side  we  have  equally  convincing  proof  that,  had 
he  been  living,  he  would  not  have  questioned  the  accuracy  and  truth 
fulness  of  the  memorandum,  as  it  is  printed  in  the  sketch.  On  page  464 
of  Volume  4  of  his  "Memoirs  and  Letters,"  edited  by  his  friend,  Mr. 


GEORGE  W.  JULIAN  59 

ment  finally  consented  to  arbitrate.  The  results  of  the  arbitra 
tion  were  in  the  main  satisfactory  to  England,  and  I  remember 
that  some  years  afterwards  General  Harrison,  who  had  represented 
America  in  the  proceedings,  expressed  to  me  much  dissatisfaction 
at  the  conduct  of  the  arbitrators  who,  as  it  seemed  to  him,  were 
more  anxious  to  compromise  a  difficult  question  in  which  a  great 
power  was  involved  than  to  do  substantial  justice  between  the 
parties. 

Pierce,  appears  an  extract  from  a  letter  from  him  to  Mr.  George 
Bemis,  dated  January  18,  1871  (the  day  after  the  date  of  the  memo 
randum),  in  which  he  says:  Sir  John  Rose  is  here  with  proposals,  or 
rather  to  sound  our  Government.  The  English  pray  for  settlement  as 
never  before.  Mr.  Fish  has  asked  my  judgment;  I  have  sent  him  a 
memorandum  in  which  I  have  said :  "A  discrimination  in  favour  of 
claims  arising  from  the  depredations  of  any  particular  ship  will  dis 
honour  the  claims  arising  from  the  depredations  of  other  ships,  which 
the  American  Government  can  not  afford  to  do ;  nor  should  the  English 
Government  expect  it,  if  they  would  sincerely  remove  all  occasions  of 
difference." 

Thus  it  is  established,  on  the  authority  of  Mr.  Sumner,  that  before 
January  18,  1871,  he  sent  a  memorandum  to  Mr.  Fish  at  the  latter's 
request  and  that  clause  four  in  that  memorandum  as  printed  by  me 
formed  a  part  of  the  memorandum  so  sent.  The  doubting  Thomas, 
being  thus  deprived  of  all  power  of  questioning  those  two  facts,  is 
reduced  to  denying  that  clauses  one,  two  and  three  were  in  the  paper 
so  sent  to  Mr.  Fish. 

On  this  point,  without  considering  the  evidence  of  witnesses  who 
saw  the  original  containing  these  clauses  and  who  recognised  all  as 
in  Mr.  Sumner's  handwriting,  I  content  myself  with  referring  to 
evidence  which  Mr.  Sumner's  warmest  friends  can  not  question. 

This  memorandum,  as  I  have  already  said,  was  first  made  public 
on  the  4th  day  of  January,  1878.  In  the  following  summer  Mr.  Sum 
ner's  biographer,  Mr.  Pierce,  published  an  able  and  somewhat  caustic 
article  in  the  North  American  Review,  contesting  every  position  that 
I  had  taken,  except  the  one  that  the  memorandum  with  four  clauses 
which  I  described  had  been  sent  by  Mr.  Sumner  to  Mr.  Fish  on  the 
I7th  of  January.  As  to  that  he  said  (and  when  he  said  it  he  was,  and 
for  nearly  five  years  had  been,  in  possession  of  all  of  Mr.  Sumner's 
confidential  papers)  :  "Mr.  Sumner  appears  to  have  thought  the  prox 
imity  to  us  of  the  British  possessions  a  cause  of  irritation  and  dis 
turbance,  by  furnishing  a  basis  of  operations  for  Fenians,  and  in  order 
to  make  the  settlement  complete  and  prevent  all  controversy  in  the 
future  he  proposed  the  peaceful  and  voluntary  withdrawal  of  the 


6o       INDIANA  ASSOCIATIONS,  JULIAN,  RILEY,  ETC. 

MUGWUMPS 

In  1896  I  read  a  paper  before  the  Tuesday  Club  which  attracted 
much  hostile  criticism.  The  people  of  Richmond  had  been  warm 
supporters  of  President  Harrison,  and  those  who  had  flinched 
in  their  devotion  to  him  were  anathema  among  a  considerable  por 
tion  of  our  population.  I  had  opposed  him  in  the  preceding 
Presidential  campaign.  Walking  one  day  past  St.  Paul's  Episco 
pal  Church,  which  was  undergoing  repairs,  I  heard  a  voice  from 
the  top  of  the  spire  crying  out  in  tones  of  great  contempt,  "What's 
the  matter  with  Benny,  you  damned  old  mugwump?"  I  looked 
up  to  see  whence  the  voice  proceeded,  and  observed  a  man  dodging 
behind  the  spire.  This  reproach  coming  from  the  very  pinnacle 
of  the  house  of  God  seemed  a  suitable  text  for  a  dissertation  on 
"Mugwumps,"  which  I  accordingly  prepared  for  the  Club,  show 
ing  the  necessity  of  independence  in  politics  if  we  were  to  have 
any  real  consideration  of  principles  or  persons  in  any  election. 
The  two  leading  parties  could  not  be  relied  on  to  advocate  the 
best  measures  or  nominate  the  best  men  if  they  were  sure  in 
advance  of  full  support  if  they  advocated  bad  principles  and 


British  flag  from  the  continent.  .  .  .  That  he  laid  no  greater  stress  upon 
this  part  of  his  memorandum  appears  clearly  enough  from  a  letter 
he  wrote  the  day  after  to  George  Bemis,  in  which,  mentioning  the  fact 
of  his  memorandum,  he  refers  to  the  clause  in  it  concerning  the  depre 
dations  of  the  several  cruisers  but  without  any  reference  to  the  clause 
respecting  Canada." 

Fifteen  years  later,  as  I  have  already  stated,  this  letter  to  Mr.  Bemis 
appeared  in  Volume  4  of  "Sumner's  Memoirs."  Mr.  Pierce  still  made 
no  question  as  to  the  genuineness  of  the  memorandum  and  of  each 
of  its  four  clauses.  We  are  therefore  justified  in  regarding  this  letter 
to  Mr.  Bemis  as  strong  confirmatory  proof,  on  the  part  of  Mr.  Sumner 
and  his  friends,  of  the  authenticity  of  the  memorandum,  as  published 
by  me. 

I  permit  myself  to  add,  in  conclusion,  that  you  are  at  liberty  to 
make  any  use  of  this  letter  which,  in  your  judgment,  the  interests  of 
truth  and  justice  may  require. 

I  am,  dear  sir, 

Very  truly  yours, 

J.  C.  BANCROFT  DAVIS. 


MUGWUMPS  6 1 

nominated  bad  men.  Party  government  was  most  beneficial 
if  there  were  mugwumps  to  repudiate  it  when  it  failed  to  do  its 
duty.  If  reform  within  the  party  accomplished  its  work  it  would 
also  keep  within  the  party  those  who  were  devoted  to  reform; 
but  if  it  failed,  then  reform  from  without  the  party  and  by  the 
defeat  of  the  party  was  the  last  remaining  remedy  and  one  which 
the  mugwump  did  not  intend  to  relinquish.  I  also  insisted  that 
a  mugwump,  by  adhering  to  principles  rather  than  party  organi 
sation,  might  be  even  less  open  to  the  charge  of  vacillation  than 
the  straight  party  man. 

While  there  was  some  support  of  these  doctrines,  the  dissent 
was  quite  pronounced.  I  remember  that  among  the  guests  that 
evening  was  Gen.  O.  O.  Howard,  who  evidently  did  not  approve 
at  all,  for,  being  called  upon  for  some  remarks  upon  the  paper, 
he  observed  in  the  politest  manner  possible  that  although  he  was 
himself  a  warm  Republican,  he  would  a  great  deal  rather  be  a 
Democrat  than  not  belong  to  any  party  at  all. 

It  was  in  October  of  the  following  year  that  I  was  invited 
to  address  the  National  Conference  of  Unitarian  Churches  at  Sara 
toga  on  "The  Citizen  and  the  Republic."  Senator  Hoar  pre 
sided.  I  gave  utterance  to  some  sentiments  similar  to  those  of  the 
Tuesday  Club  paper  and  was  conscious  while  speaking  that  the 
good  old  gentleman  was  turning  his  revolving  chair  first  to  one 
side  and  then  to  the  other  in  considerable  agitation.  As  he  was 
the  presiding  officer  he  felt  he  had  no  right  to  reply,  but  he  after 
wards  remarked  that  he  would  have  given  a  hundred  dollars  for 
a  chance  to  answer  such  arguments;  that  these  Mugwumps  were 
willing  to  imperil  the  rights  of  a  whole  race  on  account  of  mat 
ters  which  were  comparatively  trifling.  Perhaps  he  was  the  more 
annoyed  because  the  audience  was  warmly  with  me  in  my  ad 
vocacy  of  political  independence. 

Of  course  all  such  advocacy  should  have  its  limitations.  Im 
portant  political  work  can  only  be  done  by  the  co-operation  of 
those  who  think  alike,  and  this  implies  party  government.  Every 
member  of  a  party  ought  to  be  prepared  to  yield  much,  if  through 
its  agency  he  can  secure  a  greater  good  to  his  country.  But  if 
the  balance  be  against  what  he  considers  best,  he  should  not  hesi 
tate  to  abandon  his  party,  acting  independently  or  even  allying 


62       INDIANA  ASSOCIATIONS,  JULIAN,  RILEY,  ETC. 

himself  with  its  adversary.      Party  fealty  with  most  of  our  people 
had  become  a  fetich  which  needed  to  be  discredited. 


INDIANAPOLIS   LITERARY    CLUB 

I  became  a  member  at  quite  an  early  day  of  the  Indianapolis 
Literary  Club.  This  had  long  been  organised  on  much  the  same 
basis  as  the  Tuesday  Club,  except  that  the  discussions  following 
the  papers  were  more  informal.  A  good  many  eminent  men  at 
one  time  and  another  have  belonged  to  this  club,  among 
others  Benjamin  Harrison,  Thomas  A.  Hendricks,  Walter  Q. 
Gresham,  Rev.  Myron  W.  Reed,  Gov.  Albert  G.  Porter,  Rev. 
Oscar  McCulloch,  Addison  C.  Harris,  Albert  J.  Beveridge,  Charles 
W.  Fairbanks,  John  L.  Griffiths,  Gen.  Lew  Wallace  and  James 
Whitcomb  Riley.  The  Club  used  to  be  very  particular  as  to  the 
members  elected,  and  blackballing  was  so  frequent  that  Myron 
Reed  once  said  that  not  a  member  then  in  the  Club  could  get  back 
if  he  had  to  be  voted  on  by  the  rest  of  them. 

The  papers  were  for  the  most  part  of  high  quality  and  the  dis 
cussions  spicy.  There  was  usually  a  good  deal  of  fun  at  the 
annual  dinners,  but  this  was  not  always  the  case.  There  was  one 
to  which  the  ladies  were  invited  where  the  speeches  were  so 
numerous  and  so  long  that  I  was  called  upon  for  some  happy 
remarks  at  two  o'clock  in  the  morning,  and  this  without  a  blessed 
thing  to  drink  but  water. 

The  Club  did  some  extraordinary  things.  I  recall  a  certificate 
of  good  character,  elegantly  engrossed,  which  we  furnished  to 
Benjamin  Harrison,  then  President-elect,  on  the  eve  of  his  de 
parture  to  Washington.  This  testimonial,  coming  from  the  place 
where  he  worked  last,  undoubtedly  entitled  him  to  the  confidence 
of  the  American  people! 

WESTERN  ASSOCIATION  OF   WRITERS 

At  quite  an  early  period  there  was  organised  "The  Western 
Association  of  Writers,"  which  held  meetings  both  at  Indianapolis 
and  elsewhere  in  Indiana.  This  society,  however,  seemed  en 
grossed,  not  so  much  in  general  discussions  on  literature,  as  in 
displaying  the  excellencies  of  the  works  of  its  own  members. 


THE  INDIANA  SOCIETY  OF  CHICAGO  63 

We  edified  each  other  by  the  reading  of  poems,  stories  and  other 
productions,  many  of  which  were  considered  tedious  by  those 
who  did  not  themselves  deliver  them.  I  noticed  too  that  while 
James  Whitcomb  Riley,  Lew  Wallace,  and  other  well-known 
names  were  on  the  list  of  members,  they  did  not  often  attend  the 
meetings  and  the  programmes  were  mainly  filled  with  the  pro 
ductions  of  persons  comparatively  unknown.  I  still  have  a  pro 
gramme  of  the  tenth  annual  meeting  at  Warsaw,  Indiana,  in  1895, 
where  the  performances  lasted  through  five  mortal  days! 

JAMES   WHITCOMB   RILEY 

On  one  occasion  the  association  proposed  to  give  Riley  a  com 
plimentary  dinner  at  the  Dennison  Hotel  in  Indianapolis.  I  was 
on  the  committee  managing  the  affair  and  during  the  afternoon 
Riley  asked  me  into  his  room.  Things  were  in  utter  confusion, 
clothing  on  the  floor,  a  valise  on  the  bed,  and  everything  at  sixes 
and  sevens.  Riley  looked  at  me  in  dismay  and  ejaculated,  "It 
is  always  this  way  with  me,  a  place  for  everything  and  not  a 
damned  thing  in  it."  Riley  was  a  prince  of  raconteurs;  he  always 
had  an  assortment  of  good  stories,  and  nobody  could  tell  them 
as  he  could.  His  accent  and  the  expression  of  his  countenance 
were  inimitable.  All  who  knew  the  man  were  very  fond  of  him. 
When  he  visited  the  homes  of  his  friends  he  attracted  children 
to  him  like  a  magnet.  He  would  take  a  child  upon  his  lap  and 
draw  wonderful  pictures  and  improvise  stories  of  what  some  boy 
or  dog  or  rabbit  was  doing,  while  the  eyes  of  his  little  listener 
were  wide  open  with  wonder  and  delight. 

Riley's  poetry,  as  well  as  his  personality,  had  a  very  whole 
some  effect  upon  the  people  of  the  state.  Indeed,  the  Hoosier's 
homely  ways,  the  plain  things  of  life  and  the  kindly  sympathy 
which  he  epitomised,  spread  their  influence  far  beyond  the  boun 
daries  of  the  state  and  even  of  the  nation. 

THE  INDIANA  SOCIETY  OF   CHICAGO 

An  organisation  which  I  have  enjoyed  immensely  is  the  Indiana 
Society  of  Chicago.  There  were  generally  five  or  six  hundred  of 


64       INDIANA  ASSOCIATIONS,  JULIAN,  RILEY,  ETC. 

us  seated  at  the  tables  in  the  ballroom  of  the  Congress  Hotel,  and 
various  were  the  "stunts"  performed — there  were  humorous 
speeches  by  all  sorts  of  people,  and  there  were  successful  vaude 
ville  performances.  In  1919  a  burlesque  political  convention  was 
held  at  which  many  of  the  members  were  involuntary  candidates 
for  President;  I  was  the  poets'  candidate  and  McCutcheon  had  a 
cartoon  representing  me  in  evening  dress  bestriding  Pegasus,  while 
America  bristled  with  most  appropriate  exclamation  and  inter 
rogation  points.2 


JEKYL    ISLAND    CLUB 

I  was  for  a  good  many  years  a  member  of  the  Jekyl  Island 
Club,  which  occupied  one  of  the  sea  islands  off  the  coast  of 
Georgia.  There  were  forests  of  pine  and  live  oak,  a  broad,  hard 
beach,  a  bicycle  trail  through  the  woods,  and  very  attractive  roads 
and  forest  paths  for  driving  and  riding.  I  had  a  number  of 
friends  among  the  members,  and  there  were  various  interesting 
prominent  men  who  came  as  visitors:  Dr.  Weir  Mitchell,  Thomas 
Bailey  Aldrich,  and  others.  President  McKinley  once  spent  a 
few  days  on  the  island,  sitting  (as  Dooley  described  it)  "under 
the  coupon  trees." 

1  used  to  play  chess  a  good  deal  with  Thomas  Nelson  Page, 
but  I  recall  a  remark  he  made  which  has  discouraged  me  from 
giving  much  attention  to  the  game  since  that  time.     He  said, 
"I  found  that  I  could  write  a  story  with  about  the  same  effort 
that  it  took  to  play  a  half-dozen  games,  and  writing  the  story 
was  more  worth  while,  so  I  do  not  play  so  much  as  I  used  to." 

Dr.  Weir  Mitchell  was  a  rare  companion.  We  used  to  go  out 
canoeing  and  had  long  talks  together.  He  was  one  of  the  most 
distinguished  physicians  of  his  time,  especially  in  the  treatment 
of  nervous  disorders,  and  many  were  the  stories  of  his  original  and 
sometimes  radical  methods  of  treating  his  patients.  One  of  them, 

2  On   one   of  these   occasions   I    spoke  on   "Indiana's   Output"    (see 
Appendix  I),  and  a  few  years  later  I  discussed  the  instructions  to  be 
given  by  the  outgoing  Vice-President,  Mr.  Fairbanks,  to  the  incoming 
Vice-President,   Mr.   Marshall,   upon  the  duties  as  well  as  the  vices 
appropriate  to  the  office. 


JEKYL  ISLAND  CLUB  65 

a  woman,  had  been  bedridden  for  years  and  insisted  upon  her 
inability  to  move.  He  was  satisfied  that  her  disease  was  imag 
inary  and  had  a  fire  kindled  under  her  bed.  Her  recovery  was 
immediate.  At  this  time  (it  was  shortly  after  the  publication  of 
"Hugh  Wynne,  Free  Quaker")  he  prided  himself  more  upon  his 
accomplishments  in  literature  than  in  his  profession,  a  judgment 
which  the  world  will  hardly  ratify.  I  remember  he  had  quite 
a  strong  feeling  against  the  kind  of  education  given  at  Bryn 
Mawr  College  (where  my  daughters  had  been  students),  believing 
that  it  did  not  properly  provide  for  the  domestic  duties  of  a 
woman's  life.  He  contrasted  it  with  the  Sorbonne,  in  which  he 
said  every  girl  was  required  to  show,  before  she  was  admitted, 
that  she  understood  thoroughly  the  things  that  were  necessary 
to  the  proper  conduct  of  a  household  by  the  mother  of  a 
family. 

Aldrich  was  an  interesting  man  in  conversation,  but  upon  one 
subject  he  was  devoid  of  a  sense  of  humour.  I  once  imprudently 
rallied  him  on  certain  peculiarities  of  Boston.  Now  if  a  man 
could  not  make  fun  of  Boston,  life  would  be  lacking  in  one  of 
its  most  wholesome  sources  of  merriment.  I  had  artlessly  told 
him  of  an  incident  which  happened  at  a  dinner  given  in  that 
city  to  the  National  Civil  Service  Reform  League,  when  the 
speeches  of  welcome  were  so  long  and  effusive  that  they  cut  out 
the  addresses  on  the  programme  which  were  to  be  delivered  by 
the  invited  guests. 

The  facts  were  these.  The  president  of  the  Massachusetts 
Association  welcomed  us  in  no  stinted  phrase.  Then  the  Speaker 
of  the  Legislature  consumed  half  an  hour  in  telling  us  how  much 
he  admired  us.  Then  the  representative  of  the  Bay  State  in  Mr. 
Cleveland's  cabinet,  Mr.  Richard  S.  Olney,  told  us  how  precious 
were  our  contributions  to  political  and  social  welfare;  then  the 
head  of  Harvard  University,  Dr.  Eliot,  assured  us  that  the 
success  of  our  movement  was  written  in  the  eternal  laws  of 
nature,  and  finally  Pat  Collins,  then  mayor  of  Boston,  filled  with  a 
double  inspiration,  descanted  at  great  length  upon  the  tremen 
dous  obligation  which  the  world  owed  to  the  guests  of  the 
evening.  Mr.  Gilman,  president  of  the  League,  and  Mr.  Carl 
Schurz  were  the  only  gentlemen  outside  of  Boston  whose  remarks 


66       INDIANA  ASSOCIATIONS,  JULIAN,  RILEY,  ETC. 

had  deflected  even  for  a  moment  this  uninterrupted  stream  of 
welcome.  Among  the  remaining  guests  of  the  evening,  Mr.  Bona 
parte,  Mr.  Garfield,  Commissioner  Procter  and  I  had  been  set 
down  upon  the  printed  programme  for  speeches. 

Now  the  Boston  man  knows  many  things,  but  two  things  he 
knows  supremely  well.  The  first  is  the  time  to  go  to  bed,  and 
the  second  is  that  when  Boston  has  spoken,  all  has  been  said  that 
is  worth  hearing.  Boston  had  spoken,  the  welcome  was  complete, 
and  bedtime  was  at  hand.  So  the  audience  began  to  crumble, 
leaving  a  few  meagre  remnants  for  Procter  and  Garfield,  and 
none  at  all  for  Bonaparte  and  me,  and  we  departed  quite  over 
come  by  the  heartiness  of  our  welcome. 

It  was  soon  clear,  however,  that  such  a  story  would  not  do  at 
all  in  such  a  presence.  Mr.  Aldrich  was  himself  Boston  incar 
nate  and  upon  anything  indicating  a  flaw  in  its  perfections  he 
was  up  in  arms  in  its  defence.  He  resented  the  anecdote  and 
was  never  so  cordial  afterwards.  I  solaced  myself  with  the 
thought,  "Blessed  indeed  is  such  a  city  to  possess,  among  the  most 
distinguished  of  her  sons,  one  who  will  not  permit  even  the  lightest 
raillery  to  cast  a  blemish  upon  her  infinite  excellence." 

But  the  men  who  unconsciously  furnished  the  greatest  amuse 
ment  at  Jekyl  were  the  millionaires  who  ran  the  Club.  These  men 
when  talking  together  really  spoke  as  if  they  were  also  run 
ning  the  government  of  the  United  States — and  perhaps  they 
were,  more  than  we  knew!  When  President  McKinley  was 
there  he  was  under  their  special  protection,  and  when  the 
war  with  Spain  broke  out  some  of  them  were  impressed  with  the 
idea  that  the  island  might  be  attacked  and  they  even  hinted  that 
the  members  might  be  held  for  ransom!  An  account  was  actually 
published  in  one  of  the  newspapers  of  an  imaginary  piratical 
incursion  for  this  purpose,  whereupon  a  ridiculous  demand  was 
made  on  the  government  for  military  protection,  and  a  cannon  of 
the  heaviest  calibre  was  sent  down  and  installed  at  the  south 
end  of  the  island.  Here  it  stayed  for  some  years  buried  more  and 
more  deeply  in  the  sand. 

We  had  at  Jekyl  Island  one  form  of  sport  not  common  in 
America — hunting  the  wild  boar.  There  were  a  great  many  wild 
hogs  in  the  island,  a  cross  between  the  German  boar  and  the 


EARLHAM  COLLEGE  67 

southern  razor-back,  huge,  swift  beasts  not  easy  to  catch  or  kill. 
Parties  were  organised  to  hunt  them  by  moonlight.  We  first  drove 
to  the  part  of  the  island  they  most  frequented,  and  then,  following 
the  dogs,  started  off  through  the  palmettoes  after  them.  There 
were  two  kinds  of  dogs  employed  in  the  chase,  first  the  ordinary 
hunting  dog  to  follow  the  scent,  and  then  "ketch  dogs,"  as  they 
were  called,  to  hang  on  to  the  ears  and  legs  of  the  victim  and 
hold  him  until  some  one  could  come  up  with  a  long  knife  to 
finish  him.  But  this  work  was  generally  done  by  the  game 
keeper,  while  the  ladies  and  gentlemen  who  formed  the  party 
stood  around  and  "assisted"  with  their  eyes  only.  It  was  not  a 
very  edifying  sport,  although  the  scene  was  a  weird  one  in  the 
semi-tropical  forest  under  a  full  moon. 

We  once  had  an  entertainment  which  was  unique.  The  negroes 
on  the  island  were  accustomed  each  year  to  give  us  a  "cake- 
walk,"  and  a  committee  of  three  members  was  appointed  on  such 
occasions  to  award  and  distribute  the  prizes.  But  one  day  it 
was  proposed  that  there  should  be  a  cake-walk  on  the  beach  in 
which  we  should  do  the  cake-walking  and  a  committee  selected 
by  the  negroes  should  award  the  prizes.  We  all  drove  down  to 
the  south  end  of  the  island,  and  there,  upon  the  broad,  hard 
beach,  we  exhibited  our  graces  in  this  fine  art  and  submitted  our 
merits  to  the  judgment  of  three  Ethiopians,  one  the  deputy  game 
keeper,  as  black  as  the  ace  of  spades,  another,  our  hall  boy,  and 
the  third  a  little  fellow  who  distributed  the  papers  on  the  island. 
A  circle  was  formed  by  the  carriages  which  had  brought  us  to 
the  spot.  We  arrayed  ourselves  in  the  most  grotesque  apparel 
we  could  find  and  marched  around  in  pairs  with  all  the  serious 
ness  and  grace  we  could  command,  while  the  three  little  blacka 
moors,  standing  upon  an  improvised  platform,  solemnly  deter 
mined  who  did  his  part  the  best  and  quite  perverted  their  respon 
sible  office,  as  I  thought,  by  awarding  me  the  booby  prize! 


EARLHAM    COLLEGE 

But  to  return  to  Richmond,  Indiana. 

My  connection  with  Earlham  College  has  been  rather  close. 
One  year  I  gave  a  series  of  lectures  on  municipal  law  to  the  more 


68       INDIANA  ASSOCIATIONS,  JULIAN,  RILEY,  ETC. 

advanced  students,  and  I  used  to  speak  quite  often  on  various 
subjects  in  the  chapel. 

One  evening  the  theme  was  Russian  Literature.  There  was 
nothing  humorous  about  it,  but  I  noticed  that  every  few  minutes 
a  ripple  of  laughter  would  spread  over  the  audience  and  I  won 
dered  what  it  was  all  about.  It  confused  me.  I  thought  there 
must  be  something  grotesque  about  my  personal  appearance. 

I  was  standing  alone  upon  a  wide  platform  and  finally  noticed 
that  the  students  were  all  looking  a  little  to  the  left  of  me  during 
one  of  these  waves  of  suppressed  merriment.  I  turned  around 
and  there,  about  ten  feet  away  and  a  little  behind  me,  was  a 
small  black-and-tan  terrier,  his  head  cocked  slightly  on  one  side, 
with  one  ear  up  and  the  other  down,  looking  at  me  in  a  very 
interested  way  and  wagging  his  little  tail  as  if  with  entire  appro 
bation  of  what  I  had  been  saying.  This  was  amusing  enough,  but 
what  was  to  be  done?  I  did  not  care  to  begin  a  dog  chase  on 
that  platform,  and  there  was  no  one  who  offered  to  help  me  out, 
so  I  congratulated  the  audience  on  the  double  character  of  the 
entertainment  I  had  been  able  to  furnish  and  endeavoured  to 
forge  ahead  with  my  lecture.  But  it  would  not  work.  The  atten 
tion  of  the  audience  was  permanently  directed  to  the  dog,  and 
after  pumping  away  to  very  little  purpose  for  fifteen  or  twenty 
minutes  more,  I  closed  the  lecture,  which  was  a  flat  failure.  As 
I  left  the  hall,  I  remarked  to  a  companion  that  the  boys  had  got 
the  best  of  me  that  time,  that  the  joke  was  a  good  one  and  very 
successful.  A  student  heard  me  and  remarked,  "I  hope,  Mr. 
Foulke,  that  you  don't  think  we  played  any  trick  on  you.  The 
dog  came  in  with  you  and  we  thought  he  was  your  dog,  so  we 
didn't  like  to  take  him  away." 

I  reflected  as  I  drove  home  that  those  boys  were  much  better 
behaved  than  I  had  been  when  I  was  in  college.  I  should  have 
rejoiced  above  all  things  at  the  opportunity  to  play  such  a  prank 
and  have  it  succeed  so  well. 

In  1906  the  college  conferred  on  me  the  honorary  degree  of 
Doctor  of  Laws,  an  honour  that  I  greatly  appreciated,  as  well  as 
the  gracious  words  with  which  it  was  bestowed  by  President 
Robert  L.  Kelly.  But  I  like  to  recall  the  amusing  way  in  which 
the  movement  to  grant  me  this  degree  directly  started.  Cleveland, 


SWARTHMORE  COLLEGE  69 

the  young  son  of  my  friend,  Professor  C.  K.  Chase,  had  from 
the  first  insisted,  for  some  reason  of  his  own,  upon  calling  me 
"Dokker  Foulke"  until  one  day  his  father,  declaring  that  if  I 
was  to  be  called  "Doctor,"  I  should  possess  the  title,  stated  his 
intention  of  taking  up  the  question  with  the  college  authorities. 
The  degree  was  conferred  upon  me  soon  afterwards. 


SWARTHMORE   COLLEGE 

In  1891  1  was  called  to  the  presidency  of  Swarthmore,  a  college 
established  by  the  Hicksite  Friends  in  Pennsylvania.  I  had  pre 
pared  to  remove  thither  and  had  sent  on  my  furniture  and  closed 
my  house  at  Richmond,  when  the  sudden  death  of  my  wife's 
brother,  who  was  killed  in  a  railway  accident,  left  the  family 
business  interests,  which  were  quite  complicated,  entirely  with 
out  a  caretaker.  There  was  no  alternative  but  to  return.  The 
students  afterwards  celebrated  by  an  appropriate  dramatic  per 
formance  the  sudden  defection  of  a  president  who  thus  died 
"a-bornin." 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE  STATE  SENATE 

INTO  what  seething  cauldron  did  we  cast 
Our  measures,  wise  and  foolish,  small  and  great ! 

How  faint  the  hope  they  would  emerge  ai  last 
As  wholesome  rules  to  guide  a  sovereign  state ! 

No  art  nor  craft  the  great  world  ever  saw 

More  lawless  than  the  making  of  the  law. 

THE   CAMPAIGN 

In  the  spring  of  1882  I  resolved  to  seek  the  Republican  nomi 
nation  for  state  senator.  In  Wayne  County  the  candidates  were 
not  chosen  by  a  delegate  convention,  but  by  an  open  primary  at 
which  any  member  of  the  party  might  present  his  name  to  the 
electors.  I  was  successful  and  became  the  nominee  of  the  party. 

The  leading  question  at  that  time  was  whether  a  proposed 
amendment  to  the  Indiana  constitution  prohibiting  the  sale  of 
liquor — an  amendment  which  had  been  passed  by  the  preceding 
legislature — should  also  be  passed  by  the  incoming  General  As 
sembly,  so  as  to  make  possible  its  submission  to  the  people.  The 
Republican  Party  in  its  platform  had  declared  that  it  was  in 
favour  of  such  submission  without,  however,  expressing  any 
opinion  regarding  the  merits  of  the  amendment  itself.  The  Green 
back  Party  was  actively  in  favour  of  prohibition,  and  the  Demo 
cratic  Party  was  opposed  to  it.  I  had  the  support  of  most  of  the 
temperance  organisations  in  the  county,  which  were  primarily  in 
terested  in  seeing  that  the  amendment  was  submitted  and  knew 
that  this  could  only  be  done  through  the  Republican  Party.  But 
the  Greenback  paper,  the  Weekly  News,  began  a  violent  attack 
upon  me.  In  its  issue  of  May  20,  1882,  the  whole  first  page  was 
devoted  to  a  disquisition  upon  my  various  shortcomings,  the  head 
lines  being,  "Foulke's  Faults,  Two  Hundred  Dollars'  Worth  of 
Choice  Wine.  How  and  Why  His  Nomination  Was  Secured,"  etc. 

70 


THE  SESSION  OF  1883  71 

The  editor  had  heard  of  a  few  cases  of  wine  I  had  ordered,  had 
magnified  it  to  the  proper  size  to  suit  his  requirements,  and  now 
expatiated  at  great  length  upon  my  wickedness. 

Week  in  and  week  out  the  News  harped  upon  this  string  as 
well  as  upon  the  fact  that  I  was  the  attorney  of  a  bank  and  of  a 
railroad.  Its  opposition,  however,  was  ineffectual.  I  obtained  a 
majority  of  about  eighteen  hundred.  The  News  then  published  a 
large  cartoon,  which  it  thus  described: 

Foulke  is  represented  standing  with  one  foot  on  the  Goddess  of 
Liberty.  On  his  head  is  the  royal  insignia  of  power  which  his  party 
has  just  invested  him  with.  In  one  hand  he  holds  a  glass  of  wine 
and  in  the  other  a  stump  of  prohibition.  Behind  him  stands  the  money 
power.  In  one  pocket  is  the  sign  of  his  professional  business  as  attor 
ney  of  the  railroads  and  banks.  In  another  pocket  are  copies  of  the 
Palladium,  Item  and  Telegram.  These  papers  dance  like  puppets  to 
the  jingle  of  his  "rocks."  In  another  of  Foulke's  numerous  pockets 
is  a  spirited  endorsement  by  the  Woman's  Suffrage  Association  and 
the  Woman's  Christian  Temperance  Union.  Foulke  partly  owes  his 
election  to  the  untiring  efforts  of  the  W.C.T.U.  in  his  behalf.  The 
Goddess  of  Liberty  holds  in  one  hand  Truth  and  Justice  ...  in  the 
other  hand  is  the  Weekly  News,  the  only  newspaper  in  Wayne  County 
that  has  told  the  people  the  truth. 

But  in  spite  of  truth,  justice,  the  Goddess  of  Liberty,  and  the 
Weekly  News,  I  had  been  elected  to  the  Senate  for  four  years,  a 
term  which  would  include  the  two  biennial  sessions  beginning  in 
January,  1883  and  1885,  respectively. 


THE  SESSION  OF    1883 

There  was  nothing  very  remarkable  about  either  of  these  ses 
sions,  but  perhaps  for  that  very  reason  they  are  the  more  typical 
of  the  legislation  of  that  period.  There  was  a  good  deal  of 
small  politics  in  the  General  Assembly,  and  in  1883  there  was  a 
group  of  six  or  eight  men  in  our  Senate  of  fifty  members  whom 
I  believed  to  be  purchasable.  Albert  G.  Porter,  a  Republican, 
was  governor  of  the  state,  and  Thomas  Hanna,  also  a  Republican, 
was  Lieutenant-Governor  and  presided  over  the  Senate.  In  that 
body  there  were  twenty-eight  Democrats  and  twenty-two  Republi- 


72  THE  STATE  SENATE 

cans.  The  leader  of  the  Democrats  was  Jason  B.  Brown,  from 
Jackson  County,  otherwise  known  as  "Bazoo  Brown,"  a  rough  and 
unscrupulous,  but  an  able  and  singularly  eloquent  man.  Another 
prominent  member  on  the  Democratic  side  was  Rufus  Magee  of 
Logansport,  who  had  the  independence  to  oppose  his  own  party 
on  several  important  matters  and  with  whom  I  formed  a  close 
and  enduring  friendship  in  spite  of  our  many  "brushes"  on  the 
floor  of  the  Senate.  The  leader  of  the  Republican  minority  was 
Jesse  J.  Spann  of  Rushville,  who  used  to  insist  in  some  of  our 
caucuses  that  it  was  our  highest  duty  as  Republicans  to  vote  for 
every  bad  measure  and  thus  make  the  record  of  the  Legislature 
infamous  so  as  to  insure  the  overthrow  of  the  Democrats  at  the 
next  election!  But  such  efforts  would  have  been  quite  superflu 
ous.  The  Democratic  majority  made  a  most  unenviable  record 
without  our  assistance. 

I  was  pretty  green  in  politics,  but  learned  a  good  deal  as  time 
went  on,  not  only  from  my  own  experience  but  from  some  of  my 
good  friends  who  gave  me  the  results  of  theirs.  For  instance,  one 
day  as  I  was  returning  on  the  train  from  Indianapolis,  one  of 
these  who  had  served  in  the  Legislature  before  gave  me  some 
fatherly  counsel.  He  warned  me  against  "those  temperance  peo 
ple."  "They  will  howl  and  howl  and  howl,"  he  said,  "but  when 
it  comes  to  the  election,  there  isn't  a  damned  vote.  But  you  just 
tie  up  with  some  reliable  saloon-keeper.  He  will  bring  the  boys 
in  squads  to  the  polls."  Unhappily  I  could  not  profit  by  this 
advice,  since  I  never  ran  for  office  afterwards. 

We  really  had  a  great  deal  of  fun  in  that  Legislature,  though 
our  career  was  not  fruitful  in  good  laws. 

I  introduced  a  bill  giving  to  married  women  all  the  rights 
of  single  women,  but  it  came  to  an  early  death.  I  introduced  a 
bill  to  provide  for  the  registration  of  voters,  as  expressly  com 
manded  by  the  Constitution,  but  was  told  by  "Bazoo"  Brown, 
"I  don't  believe  our  fellows  care  much  about  a  registry  law," 
and  nothing  came  of  it.  I  offered  a  concurrent  resolution  urging 
Congress  to  support  a  woman  suffrage  amendment  to  the  Fed 
eral  Constitution,  but  no  such  foolishness  could  be  allowed.  I 
introduced  a  bill  providing  that  convicts  might  shorten  their  terms 
of  imprisonment  by  good  conduct,  and  a  bill  authorising  county 


THE  SESSION  OF  1883  73 

commissioners  to  make  the  owners  of  buildings  in  which  liquor 
was  sold  responsible  for  damages.  Indeed,  I  proposed  a  variety  of 
measures,  nearly  all  of  which  have  since  been  enacted  and  now 
seem  commonplace  enough,  but  there  was  hardly  one  which  was 
not  then  stifled  in  committee  or  voted  down  in  open  session. 

Yet  there  was  one  matter  of  local  interest  to  Wayne  County 
which  turned  out  well.  In  1883  Indiana  had  only  a  single  hos 
pital  for  the  insane,  which  was  situated  in  Indianapolis.  It  was 
greatly  overcrowded,  and  more  than  sixteen  hundred  of  these 
unhappy  creatures  were  unprovided  for,  except  in  county  poor- 
houses  and  jails,  where  they  were  kept,  sometimes  without  cloth 
ing,  frequently  confined  in  pens  and  cells,  occasionally  loaded 
with  chains  and  balls  or  fed  through  iron  gratings  or  wearing 
handcuffs  or  sleeping  on  straw.  There  was  a  demand  for  addi 
tional  asylums;  a  strong  lobby  had  come  from  Evansville,  urging 
that  one  should  be  constructed  there,  and  a  bill  had  been  intro 
duced  for  the  purpose.  Naturally  there  were  other  cities  that 
desired  to  be  favoured  in  a  like  manner.  The  time  seemed  propi 
tious  to  urge  the  claims  of  my  own  county,  so  I  joined  forces  with 
my  friend,  Senator  Magee,  and  other  aspirants  in  an  effort  to 
secure  two  additional  institutions  with  the  hope  that  Richmond 
might  be  included.  I  suggested  to  my  constituents  that  a  gift 
of  money  or  land  might  not  be  misplaced,  and  they  accordingly 
offered  twenty-five  thousand  dollars  to  buy  the  necessary  site.  I 
proposed  to  the  Senate  that  a  commission  be  appointed  to  go 
over  the  state  and  ascertain  at  what  places  the  best  facilities 
for  such  an  asylum  could  be  found  and  where  the  best  terms 
could  be  obtained  from  the  local  communities.  This  was  done, 
and  Richmond  was  chosen  for  one  of  three  new  institutions.  It 
must  be  admitted  that  this  looks  like  "pork-barrel"  legislation, 
but  the  three  asylums  were  all  needed;  they  were  immediately 
filled  and  were  soon  overcrowded.  And  there  has  been  no 
hospital  for  the  insane  more  successfully  managed  than  the  one 
established  in  Richmond.  It  has  a  widespread  reputation  for 
excellence  throughout  the  country. 

The  intense  partisanship  which  prevailed  during  this  session 
seems  to-day  almost  inconceivable.  The  very  first  bill  introduced 
into  the  Senate  by  the  Democratic  leader  was  the  so-called 


74  THE  STATE  SENATE 

''Brown  Bill,"  which  placed  the  three  existing  benevolent  insti 
tutions,  the  Hospital  for  the  Insane,  the  Asylum  for  the  Blind,  and 
the  Asylum  for  the  Deaf  and  Dumb,  in  charge  of  three  boards 
composed  of  Democratic  politicians,  and  presided  over  by  one 
Dr.  Harrison,  a  Democratic  boss.  This  was  a  measure  which 
made  these  institutions  the  mere  plunder  of  party  and  finally 
brought  such  scandal  upon  the  hospital  management  as  to  become 
a  leading  issue  four  years  later  in  the  election  of  1886  which 
drove  the  Democrats  from  power.1 

In  looking  over  the  list  of  bills  passed  at  this  session  it  is  impos 
sible  to  imagine  a  collection  of  more  trifling  and  futile  acts.  There 
were  scores  of  measures  to  legalise  illegal  transactions  of  various 
state  and  municipal  officers.  There  was  an  act  authorising  chari 
table  associations  to  change  their  names;  there  was  a  new  dog 
law;  there  was  an  act  authorising  boards  of  county  commissioners 
to  grant  bounties  for  the  destruction  of  woodchucks,  hawks  and 
owls;  there  were  acts  for  the  relief  of  sundry  municipal  officers 
who  had  lost  the  public  moneys  by  depositing  them  in  insolvent 
banks,  etc.  But  there  was  not  a  single  measure  of  importance  to 
the  state,  and  very  few  even  of  general  interest  or  application. 
It  is  doubtful  if  Indiana  in  its  entire  history  could  furnish  an 
illustration  of  a  legislature  so  utterly  useless,  where  it  was  not 
actually  injurious,  as  the  general  assembly  of  1883. 


THE   SESSION  OF    1885 

Discreditable  as  it  was,  the  record  of  this  Legislature  of  1883 
did  not  at  once  lead  to  the  overthrow  of  the  Democratic  Party;  for 
1884  was  the  year  for  the  election  of  a  President.  In  the  national 
government  the  Republicans  were  in  power;  many  abuses  existed 
and  although  the  reform  wave  which  had  swept  over  Congress 
in  1883  had  led  to  the  enactment  of  the  Civil-Service  law  and 
other  salutary  measures,  there  was  a  general  distrust  of  the  party, 
which  was  aggravated  by  its  nomination  of  James  G.  Blaine  for 
the  presidency.  Serious  scandals  had  been  connected  with  his 
name.  The  Democrats,  on  the  other  hand,  had  nominated  Grover 

1  See  "Fighting  the  Spoilsmen,"  pp.   16  to  36. 


THE  SESSION  OF  1885  75 

Cleveland,  who  had  made  a  creditable  record  as  governor  of  New 
York.  He  was  elected,  though  by  a  narrow  margin,  and  the 
Republicans  were  thrown  out  of  power  for  the  first  time  since 
the  Civil  War.  This  wave  of  national  public  sentiment  kept 
Indiana  still  in  the  Democratic  column. 

I  was  deeply  impressed  by  the  charges  made  against  Mr. 
Elaine,  supported  apparently  by  his  own  letters  and  by  his  evasive 
explanations  and  denials.  I  was  therefore  unwilling  to  vote  for 
him  or  to  take  any  part  in  the  campaign  on  his  behalf,  but  was 
too  strong  a  Republican  to  support  the  Democratic  candidate. 
I  did  not  vote  for  the  presidential  electors  at  all,  but  cast  my 
ballot  for  the  remaining  candidates  on  the  Republican  ticket. 
Such  a  course  is  rarely  justifiable.  A  voter  ought  generally  to 
choose  the  less  of  two  evils,  but  I  could  not  make  up  my  mind 
to  break  away  so  quickly  from  all  associations  with  the  party 
to  which  I  had  been  devoted  and  which  I  was  then  representing 
in  the  senate  of  my  own  state. 

The  refusal  to  vote  for  Mr.  Elaine  inevitably  aroused  intense 
indignation.  I  was  hooted  and  jeered  at  as  I  rode  through  the 
streets,  and  on  one  occasion  a  crowd  of  men  and  boys  assembled 
with  the  intention  of  marching  out  to  my  house,  breaking  the 
windows,  defacing  the  walls  and  giving  other  similar  evidences 
of  their  disapproval.  From  this,  however,  they  were  dissuaded 
through  the  counsels  of  Col.  Bridgland,  an  old  friend  of  mine, 
former  consul  at  Havre,  whose  stalwart  Republicanism  could  not 
be  suspected  by  any  one  in  this  patriotic  gathering.  A  petition 
was  started  asking  for  my  resignation  as  senator,  but  somehow 
the  project  fell  still-born  and  it  was  never  presented. 

By  the  time  the  Legislature  had  convened,  much  of  this  effer 
vescence  of  wrath  had  passed  away,  and  I  was  welcomed  with 
cordiality  by  my  old  associates.  There  were  only  seventeen  Re 
publicans  all  told  in  the  Senate  of  1885,  barely  more  than  one- 
third — just  enough,  if  we  all  stayed  away,  to  break  a  quorum  and 
prevent  the  passage  of  obnoxious  measures. 

This  Republican  minority  was  a  pretty  creditable  body  of  men. 
There  was  not  one  of  them  whom  I  ever  suspected  of  personal 
corruption.  We  worked  together  in  great  harmony  on  nearly 
every  subject  and  in  entire  good- will.  The  only  important  occa- 


76  THE  STATE  SENATE 

sion  where  we  failed  to  co-operate  with  unanimity  on  a  political 
measure  was  in  respect  to  two  apportionment  bills  which  gerry 
mandered  Indiana  in  such  a  way  as  to  give  Democrats  nearly 
twice  as  much  voting  power  as  Republicans.  The  provisions  of 
these  bills  were  so  outrageous  that  I,  for  one,  advocated  breaking 
up  a  quorum  to  prevent  them  from  becoming  laws.  It  seemed 
to  me  then  and  still  seems  to  me  that  the  measures  were  so 
iniquitous  that  they  justified  this  revolutionary  action. 

I  offered  to  contribute  largely  to  pay  the  fines  imposed  by  law 
upon  those  who  absented  themselves.  All  were  willing  to  co 
operate  in  this  extreme  measure  except  two,  one  of  whom  felt 
himself  bound  by  his  promise  to  his  constituents  not  to  take  such 
a  step,  a  position  which  we  of  course  respected. 

The  Democratic  members  were  also  cordial  at  the  beginning 
of  the  session,  especially  so  because  I  had  not  voted  for  Elaine. 
They  placed  me  upon  the  most  important  committees — even 
offered  me  the  chairmanship  of  the  Committee  on  Railroads,  but 
I  did  not  care  to  be  the  only  Republican  so  honoured,  nor  was 
I  willing  to  serve  on  that  committee  since  I  had  been  for  many 
years  a  railroad  lawyer  and  did  not  think  it  would  be  seemly  to 
take  a  leading  part  in  railroad  legislation. 

The  Senate  had  a  new  presiding  officer  at  this  session,  Mr. 
Hanna,  the  Republican  Lieu  tenant- Governor  in  1883,  being  suc 
ceeded  by  General  Mahlon  D.  Manson,  a  Democrat.  He  was  a 
veteran  officer  of  both  the  Mexican  and  Civil  wars,  a  venerable 
man  of  high  character,  and  universally  esteemed.  His  prede 
cessor  had  been  a  skilled  parliamentarian  and  an  eager  partisan. 
Gen.  Manson  was  an  honest  old  gentleman,  without  the  slightest 
knowledge  of  parliamentary  law,  but  so  transparently  fair  in  his 
conduct  and  his  rulings  that  not  one  of  us  ever  felt  disposed  to 
take  any  advantage  of  him.  Whenever  a  tangle  would  arise  over 
motions  to  amend,  to  commit,  to  lay  on  the  table,  the  previous 
question,  etc.,  he  would  not  attempt  to  decide  these  issues,  but 
would  say,  "Now  it  seems  to  me  that  this  would  be  about  the  fair 
way  to  settle  the  matter,"  and  it  always  was  so  fair  that  nobody 
ever  objected.  He  undoubtedly  gave  to  our  Republican  minority 
all  the  rights  we  were  entitled  to.  I  sat  directly  in  front  of  him 
and  was  always  recognised  if  I  addressed  him  first  (which  was 


THE  SESSION  OF  1885  77 

often  enough),  and  on  the  closing  day,  after  we  had  unanimously 
voted  our  appreciation  of  the  justice  and  impartiality  of  his  rul 
ings  and  our  strong  personal  esteem,  he  invited  the  senator  from 
Wayne  to  lead  in  singing  the  long-metre  doxology  as  a  conclud 
ing  ceremony.  The  senator  from  Wayne  made  a  lamentable  effort 
to  comply  with  his  request,  an  effort  which  was  only  saved  from 
utter  collapse  by  the  co-operation  of  others  who  were  better 
skilled. 

General  Manson  did  a  number  of  odd  things.  On  one  occasion, 
without  our  knowing  anything  about  it,  he  brought  a  venerable 
lady  up  to  his  platform  and  seated  her  beside  him  and  then  told 
us  that  Mrs.  Sarah  T.  Bolton,  the  author  of  "Paddle  Your  Own 
Canoe"  and  other  poems,  would  now  address  us.  This  she  did, 
reciting  the  poem  for  our  benefit.  Nobody  ever  thought  of  ob 
jecting  to  anything  that  Manson  did,  and  no  finer  illustration 
could  be  found  of  the  influence  of  a  simple  and  lovable  character 
upon  a  turbulent  and  often  unreasonable  body  of  men  than  the 
control  of  the  Senate  by  this  old  warrior  during  the  session  of  1885. 

In  looking  over  the  chronicles  of  this  session  and  the  abstracts 
of  the  debates  in  the  Brevier  reports,  I  am  confronted  with  a  record 
of  remarkable  garrulity.  I  introduced  more  bills  and  made  a 
great  many  more  speeches  than  any  other  man  in  the  Legislature, 
and  at  this  moment  I  wonder  that  my  fellow-members  bore  with 
me  as  well  as  they  did.  That  a  man  of  no  great  experience 
should  be  telling  a  body  of  this  description  what  it  ought  to  do 
upon  every  possible  subject  is  not  easily  to  be  endured.  They 
had,  however,  an  effective  remedy — they  could  easily  vote  me 
down,  which  they  generally  did. 

I  introduced  as  the  first  measure  of  the  session  a  Civil- 
Service  bill  similar  in  its  provisions  to  the  federal  law.  I  ad 
dressed  the  Senate  on  the  subject  at  length,  setting  forth  as  fully 
as  possible  the  advantages  of  the  competitive  system  and  urging 
its  adoption.  Quite  a  large  audience  had  gathered  on  this  occa 
sion.  Among  the  auditors  was  the  Vice-President  elect,  Hon. 
Thomas  A.  Hendricks,  who,  while  on  the  same  ticket  with  Mr. 
Cleveland,  was  not  at  all  in  favour  of  this  "schoolmaster  plan," 
as  he  called  it.  He  probably  came  out  of  curiosity  to  hear  what 
could  be  said  in  favour  of  such  an  impracticable  scheme.  The 


78  THE  STATE  SENATE 

Democrats  never  intended  to  allow  the  bill  to  became  a  law, 
but  they  gave  me  the  compliment  of  supporting  it  upon  the 
second  reading  and  it  was  ordered  engrossed.  When  it  came  up 
for  final  passage  a  number  of  these  votes  were  changed,  and  it 
was  defeated. 


INVESTIGATION   OF    THE   STATE   TREASURY 

When  the  Legislature  of  1885  convened,  Albert  G.  Porter,  the 
Republican  Governor  whose  term  was  just  expiring,  called  our 
special  attention  in  his  message  to  the  condition  of  the  funds  of 
the  state,  and  recommended  an  examination  into  the  condition  of 
the  Treasury.  I  accordingly  moved  for  a  special  joint  committee 
to  count  the  money  and  report  what  disposition  had  been  made 
of  the  public  funds.  The  resolution,  however,  was  opposed,  and 
an  amendment  adopted  that  the  committee  should  report,  first, 
what  legislation  was  desirable  and,  second,  whether  any  investi 
gation  was  necessary!  I  was  made  one  of  the  members  of  this 
committee. 

Mr.  Warren  G.  Sayre  had  been  appointed  by  the  House  of 
Representatives  as  the  Republican  member  for  that  body,  and 
he  and  I,  who  were  old  friends  from  the  previous  session,  made  up 
our  minds  that  if  the  Democratic  majority  in  the  committee 
stifled  an  investigation  we  would  lay  bare  their  conduct  before 
the  respective  houses. 

The  committee  counted  some  seventy-six  hundred  dollars  in 
cash  and  looked  at  certain  drafts,  checks,  certificates  of  deposit, 
and  county  orders  shown  by  the  Treasurer,  amounting  to  some 
four  hundred  and  eighty-odd  thousand  more,  but  they  limited 
themselves  to  this  inspection  and  made  no  enquiries  as  to  the 
ownership  or  validity  of  any  of  these  assets.  The  majority  re 
fused  to  allow  us  to  ask  whether  any  interest  had  been  received, 
or  indeed  to  ask  any  questions  whatever  or  to  count  any  special 
deposits  or  enquire  concerning  the  solvency  of  the  depositaries. 
The  committee  then  adjourned  to  enable  the  majority  to  prepare 
their  report. 

But  in  spite  of  these  handicaps  Mr.  Sayre  and  I  had  observed 
some  curious  facts.  Ninety-six  thousand  dollars  had  been  de- 


INVESTIGATION  OF  THE  STATE  TREASURY       79 

posited  in  one  of  the  banks  on  Sunday,  when  the  bank  was  not 
open;  in  a  number  of  the  vouchers  purporting  to  be  several 
months  old  the  ink  was  fresh;  sixty-four  thousand  dollars  were 
in  county  orders  long  past  due  and  unpaid,  and  as  to  some  of 
these  the  Treasurer  said  he  would  gladly  remit  the  interest  if  he 
could  get  the  principal.  As  to  a  fifty- thousand-dollar  special 
deposit  we  were  informed  that  the  sum  had  been  borrowed  and 
was  not  the  property  of  the  Treasurer  at  all ;  and  finally  we  learned 
that  thirteen  thousand  dollars  had  been  deposited  in  two  in 
solvent  banks.  All  the  securities  and  vouchers  had  been  taken 
in  violation  of  law. 

When  the  committee  reconvened,  the  majority  report  (which 
had  been  prepared  in  caucus)  was  read  to  us.  It  declared  that 
since  the  state  had  furnished  the  Treasurer  no  safe  place  to 
keep  the  money,  his  disposition  of  the  funds  involved  the  least 
possible  risk,  and  that  there  was  no  reason  why  there  should  be 
any  further  investigation. 

The  majority  were  in  such  haste  that  they  told  Mr.  Sayre  and 
myself  that  we  might  present  our  minority  report  directly  to  the 
two  houses  without  first  submitting  it  to  the  whole  committee. 
We  worked  far  into  the  night  upon  this  document  which  set  forth 
the  foregoing  irregularities.  On  the  following  morning  I  read  the 
report  to  the  Senate  as  impressively  as  possible,  with  emphasis 
upon  each  of  the  shortcomings  disclosed.  The  astonishment  and 
rage  of  the  Democratic  members  was  unbounded.  The  majority 
of  the  Committee  had  not  observed  the  fresh  ink,  the  Sunday  dates 
and  other  circumstances  which  made  our  report  so  formidable. 
Senator  McCullough,  the  Democratic  leader,  declared  that  our 
purpose  was  political,  to  show  that  the  Treasurer  had  received 
interest  on  the  state's  money  and  then  go  to  the  people  with  the 
cry  that  this  belonged  to  the  state.  By  not  giving  the  Treasurer 
any  secure  place  to  keep  the  funds  and  by  allowing  him  only  the 
pitiful  salary  of  three  thousand  dollars,  the  Legislature  had  rec 
ognised  that  the  interest  which  the  Treasurer  got  from  the  funds 
was  his  own! 

But  it  was  not  only  this  sort  of  logic  which  adorned  the  record 
of  our  proceedings  on  the  subject  of  the  State  Treasury.  There 
were  also  gems  of  passionate  oratory.  Among  these  was  a  speech 


8o  THE  STATE  SENATE 

from  "Green  Smith,"  the  senator  from  Jackson  and  Jennings. 
"From  what  source  do  these  charges  come?"  demanded  Mr.  Smith. 
"Who  is  the  witness  that  has  thus  borne  testimony?  Eye  hath  not 
seen  his  hideous  form;  ear  hath  not  heard  his  lying  voice;  he  has 
not  been  unmasked  to  the  public  gaze,  nor  has  he  written  his 
name  in  the  book  of  public  accusation,  but  from  the  filth  and 
the  grease  of  the  gutter  the  puny  head  of  this  vile  calumniator 
arises,  smoking  with  the  fumes  of  hate,  and  through  the  channels 
of  vague  suspicion  and  dishonourable  rumour  he  breathes  his 
malicious  poison  into  the  ears  of  the  people  of  Indiana.  But 
since  silence  has  cast  the  mantle  of  protection  about  the  head 
of  the  unworthy  author  of  this  political  libel,  it  may  not  be 
improper  if  I  should  say  that  the  ex-Governor  of  Indiana,  from 
the  beginning  of  this  investigation,  shadowed  the  minority  like  a 
ghost  of  ill-omen,  and  with  his  cold  and  designing  nature  guided 
its  every  action  and  inspired  its  every  motive.  .  .  .  The  minority 
report  is  as  much  his  work  as  if  he  had  penned  it.  The  hand 
is  the  hand  of  Esau,  but  the  voice  is  the  voice  of  Jacob." 

The  most  striking  feature  of  the  debate  came  in  the  speech  of 
Rufus  Magee,  the  Democratic  senator  from  Logansport,  a  man, 
as  I  have  said,  of  admirable  independence.  He  declared  that  he 
could  not  see  why  this  enquiry  was  not  to  be  met  in  that  spirit 
of  fairness  in  which  a  man  would  wish  to  meet  it  who  desired 
close  scrutiny  as  to  his  trust.  He  cared  not  whether  the  insinua 
tions  of  Governor  Porter  were  begotten  in  malice  or  not,  the 
people  had  a  right  to  know  whether  the  moneys  they  had  paid 
for  taxes  were  on  hand.  He  undertook  to  say  they  were  not.  He 
charged  that  on  this  very  day  a  warrant  drawn  against  the  gen 
eral  fund  had  been  protested,  and  he  had  the  authority  of  the 
gentleman  who  held  the  warrant  for  saying  so.  The  Treasurer 
of  the  State  ought  at  once  to  invite  the  General  Assembly  to 
make  a  complete  investigation. 

Mr.  Hilligass  followed  with  a  bitter  tirade  against  the  minority 
of  the  Committee.  Both  he  and  Green  Smith  were  very  personal, 
and  the  words  "liar  and  falsifier"  had  been  uttered  with  great 
vehemence.  It  was  now  my  turn  to  close  the  debate  for  the  day. 
In  the  gentlest  tones  and  the  most  benevolent  language  I  could 
command  I  replied  that  I  would  not  retort  in  kind  with  the  epi- 


INVESTIGATION  OF  THE  STATE  TREASURY       81 

thets  in  which  they  had  indulged.  The  senator  from  Jennings 
did  not  lie,  he  was  merely  mistaken.  At  this  mild  rejoinder  the 
galleries  and  the  Senate  itself  gave  evidence  of  amusement  and 
approval.  I  then  pointed  out  how  we  had  learned  each  fact  in 
our  report  and  asked  why  the  Indianapolis  Sentinel  and  the  Cin 
cinnati  Enquirer,  both  Democratic  organs,  took  the  same  view 
that  we  did,  and  why  Magee  and  other  Democratic  leaders  had 
insisted  that  the  Treasury  needed  an  investigation.  I  also  ex 
hibited  a  certified  copy  of  a  claim  made  by  the  Treasurer  for 
the  purpose  of  obtaining  a  dividend  upon  moneys  of  the  State 
lost  in  the  Fletcher  and  Sharpe  bank.  When  the  debate  closed 
late  in  the  afternoon  we  had  won  a  distinct  victory  in  the  argu 
ment. 

On  the  following  day  the  discussion  was  resumed.  Mr.  McCul- 
lough  closed  the  argument.  What  good,  he  asked,  would  the  in 
vestigation  do?  Why  take  the  time  of  the  Legislature  in  enquir 
ing  what  interest  had  been  received?  If  the  Legislature  would 
turn  its  attention  from  this  political  claptrap  and  secure  the  peo 
ple's  money  for  the  future,  it  would  perform  its  duty.  Within 
a  few  days  the  Treasurer  would  be  required  to  give  a  bond  for 
seven  hundred  thousand  dollars  and  the  men  who  would  go  on 
this  bond  would  investigate  the  matter  for  themselves.  Upon  con 
cluding  his  speech  Mr.  McCullough  moved  the  previous  ques 
tion;  it  was  adopted,  the  majority  report  was  concurred  in,  and 
the  investigation  suppressed. 

The  legislation  proposed  by  the  committee  did  something  to 
protect  the  state  funds  by  requiring  a  larger  bond,  but  it  en 
abled  the  Treasurer  legally  to  deposit  and  invest  the  state  money 
in  banks  and  elsewhere  without  accounting  for  interest,  a  course 
which  succeeding  Treasurers  of  both  parties  continued  to  follow. 
For  many  years  the  office  of  State  Treasurer  was  believed  to  pro 
duce  enormous  returns  to  those  who  managed  it  in  this  improper 
way.  No  actual  defalcation  afterwards  came  to  light,  but  it  was 
many  years  before  this  wasteful  system  was  abolished.2 

2  There  was  another  gem  of  oratory  in  these  debates.  In  the  other 
branch  of  the  General  Assembly  Mr.  Patton,  one  of  the  Democratic 
leaders,  in  answer  to  the  criticisms  of  the  Treasurer  made  by  Mr. 
Sayre,  closed  his  speech  with  the  following  peroration  which  in  the 


82  THE  STATE  SENATE 

TOLERATION   TOWARD   THE   NEGRO 

Reactionary  on  most  subjects  as  this  Legislature  was,  it  dis 
played  liberality  in  its  treatment  of  the  negro  quite  unusual  in 
a  Democratic  body.  One  of  the  two  members  of  the  House  of 
Representatives  from  my  own  county  was  the  Rev.  J.  M.  Town- 
send,  a  mulatto,  the  pastor  of  one  of  the  negro  churches  in  Rich 
mond.  He  was  a  man  of  high  character,  of  gentlemanly  behaviour 
and  considerable  attainments,  being  well  educated  and  having 
travelled  in  various  parts  of  the  world.  He  was  universally  es 
teemed  by  his  fellow-members,  and  the  Democrats  appeared  to 
vie  with  the  Republicans  in  their  respectful  and  courteous  treat 
ment  of  him.  He  went  with  us,  without  objection  on  the  part 
of  any  one,  on  several  junketing  expeditions,  dined  at  the  same 
table  with  the  rest  of  us,  and  was  treated  so  far  as  I  could  see 
in  exactly  the  same  manner  as  if  he  were  a  white  man.  When, 
however,  he  introduced  into  the  House  a  bill  abolishing  the  disa 
bilities  of  his  race  and  urged  its  enactment  in  an  able  speech,  the 
Republicans  supported  the  measure,  but  the  Democratic  major 
ity  voted  it  down.  But  a  Democratic  senator,  Dr.  Thompson  of 
Indianapolis,  introduced  a  civil-rights  bill  which  provided  for 
giving  to  all  people  without  regard  to  race  or  previous  condition 
the  advantages  of  all  places  of  public  accommodation  and  amuse- 

tropical  luxuriance  of  its  imagery  and  mixed  metaphors  would  be  hard 
to  match : 

"The  gentleman  from  Wabash  and  Kosciusko  puts  on  his  feathers 
and  war-paint,  constitutes  himself  the  Republican  Warwick,  and  like 
the  Colossus  of  Rhodes  bestrides  the  swash  of  Republican  corruption 
and  attempts  to  purify  the  polluted  waters  of  the  Stygian  stream  by 
dragging  the  untarnished  reputation  of  Democratic  officers  into  it, 
but  the  gentleman,  like  the  puny,  ephemeral  insect  which  dances  in  the 
sunshine  for  a  moment  and  then  ignominiously  perishes,  when  he  came 
in  contact  with  the  blaze  of  Democratic  investigation  with  his  false 
charges,  was  scorched  to  death,  and  he  cannot  avert  the  fate  of  his 
party,  which  will  be  overwhelmed  by  the  waves  of  oblivion  and  sunk 
deeper  in  obscurity  than  the  long-lost  Atlantis,  which  lies  buried 
fathoms  deep  at  the  bottom  of  the  ocean.  We  have  opened  the  books, 
and  the  first  score  is  for  an  honest  man  and  Democratic  reform !" 
Mr.  Patton's  predictions  were  not  however  confirmed  by  the  subsequent 
State  election  in  which  the  Democrats  were  disastrously  defeated. 


TOLERATION  TOWARD  THE  NEGRO  83 

ment,  and  providing  penalties  for  violation  of  the  law.  Its  pro 
visions  were  substantially  the  same  as  those  of  the  federal  civil- 
rights  bill,  which  had  recently  been  declared  unconstitutional 
because  the  subject  was  properly  one  for  state  and  not  for  na 
tional  legislation.  This  bill  was  passed  by  a  very  large  majority 
and  became  a  law. 

I  cannot  look  back  upon  this  period  of  toleration  toward  the 
negro  and  compare  it  with  the  relapse  into  race  prejudice  which 
has  taken  place  since  that  time  without  keen  regret.  It  would 
be  quite  impossible  now  for  a  negro,  however  excellent  his  char 
acter  or  high  his  qualifications,  to  be  elected  to  the  Legislature, 
and  when  I  think  of  the  numerous  conferences  I  had  with  Mr. 
Townsend  upon  the  measures  before  us,  in  which  he  was  always 
animated  by  the  sole  purpose  of  promoting  the  public  welfare, 
I  cannot  but  feel  that  we  have  gone  back  a  long  way  from  the 
ideal  which  we  ought  to  have:  that  personal  character  and  attain 
ments,  and  not  race,  sex,  nor  anything  else  beyond  a  man's  con 
trol  should  be  made  the  standard  of  selection  for  public  office 
and  the  basis  of  our  treatment  of  individuals.  Our  country  has 
no  doubt  the  right  to  protect  itself  against  an  unlimited  immi 
gration  of  people  belonging  to  other  races  which  might  threaten 
its  institutions  and  character,  but  in  its  treatment  of  its  own 
citizens  it  can  well  afford  to  be  absolutely  just. 


CHAPTER  V 
PUBLIC  QUESTIONS 

SLOWLY  the  gates  of  opportunity 

Open  at  last,  and  ever  more  and  more 
Woman  is  ruler  of  her  destiny ; 

Shattered  is  many  a  bond  that  once  she  bore; 
All  shall  be  broken!     Man  shall  seek  her  aid, 

Not  in  the  circle  of  the  hearth  alone, 
But  in  the  halls  of  state,  where  wife  and  maid 

Shall  speak  with  voice  as  potent  as  his  own. 
God  speed  the  moment  when  in  every  land 
All  doors  shall  open  to  a  woman's  hand ! 

— To  Womankind. 

WOMAN'S  SUFFRAGE 

After  moving  to  Indiana,  a  careful  study  of  Mill's  "Subjection 
of  Women"  and  Spencer's  "Social  Statics"  convinced  me  that  the 
notion  that  women  ought  to  be  kept  out  of  all  political  rights 
was  founded,  not  upon  the  reason  of  the  thing  nor  upon  the  essen 
tial  differences  of  the  sexes,  but  upon  custom,  prejudice  and  pre 
conceived  opinion.  It  was  noticeable  that  the  lower  the  grade  of 
civilisation  the  more  completely  were  women  kept  in  subjection  to 
men.  I  had  once  seen  when  travelling  across  the  plain  in 
Nebraska  in  1870,  a  Pawnee  warrior  and  his  wife  trudging  back 
to  the  reservation.  The  man  had  upon  his  shoulder  nothing  but 
his  gun.  His  squaw  bent  under  a  load  of  hay  that  seemed  big 
and  heavy  enough  for  an  ox.  Finally  the  man  grew  tired  of 
carrying  the  gun,  put  it  on  top  of  the  hay,  and  went  on  unen 
cumbered.  This  was  typical  of  the  treatment  of  women  among 
savages;  as  civilisation  advanced  and  there  was  a  greater  regard 
for  justice,  the  condition  of  women  improved,  and  it  seemed 
natural  to  believe  that  in  its  highest  stages  women  would  be  re 
garded  politically  and  in  every  other  way  as  the  equals  of  men. 
If  it  were  true  that  taxation  without  representation  was  tyranny, 

84 


WOMAN'S  SUFFRAGE  85 

why  should  women  be  taxed  and  be  subject  to  the  laws  and  yet 
not  be  represented  in  making  them?  The  demand  for  woman's 
suffrage  was  really  the  demand  for  woman's  liberty,  for  it  was 
suffrage  which,  in  the  last  analysis,  framed  the  laws  that  deter 
mined  how  far  individual  liberty  should  be  restricted  by  the  state. 
The  unlimited  right  of  one  class  or  sex  to  make  the  laws  which 
should  control  another  was  essentially  tyranny. 

In  the  early  eighties  Lucy  Stone  and  Henry  B.  Blackwell  came 
to  Richmond  to  attend  a  convention  of  Indiana  suffragists.  I  was 
greatly  impressed  with  the  logical  arguments  of  Mr.  Blackwell  and 
the  winning  persuasiveness  of  Lucy  Stone,  and  the  friendship  then 
formed  with  them  lasted  as  long  as  they  lived. 

At  that  time  it  was  proposed  that  a  constitutional  amendment 
granting  suffrage  to  women  should  be  submitted  by  the  Indiana 
Legislature  to  the  people  for  adoption.  I  was  asked  at  this 
meeting  to  express  my  views  upon  the  subject,  which  I  did  in 
some  remarks  that  were  favourably  received.  Not  long  after 
wards,  at  a  convention  of  the  American  Woman's  Suffrage  Asso 
ciation  in  Chicago,  I  was  elected  its  president.  There  were  at 
this  time  two  suffrage  associations  in  the  country.  One  of  them, 
the  "American,"  was  under  the  leadership  of  Lucy  Stone,  Henry 
B.  Blackwell,  Julia  Ward  Howe,  and  Mary  A.  Livermore,  and  the 
other,  the  National  Woman's  Suffrage  Association,  under  the  lead 
ership  of  Elizabeth  Cady  Stanton  and  Susan  B.  Anthony.  Anna 
Howard  Shaw  was  prominent  in  both.  There  had  been  a  division 
in  the  ranks  of  the  suffragists  some  years  before,  the  views  of  the 
National  Association  being  more  radical  than  those  of  the  Ameri 
can.  The  National  devoted  its  energies  mainly  toward  influencing 
Congress  to  pass  an  amendment  to  the  Federal  Constitution  grant 
ing  suffrage  to  women,  and  the  American  mainly  to  propaganda 
in  the  various  states.  Some  of  these  states,  for  instance,  Wyoming, 
had  already  incorporated  provisions  for  woman's  suffrage  in  their 
constitutions. 

It  had  been  the  custom  of  the  American  Association  to  elect 
alternately  a  man  and  a  woman  as  its  president.  Henry  Ward 
Beecher  had  at  one  time  held  that  position.  I  was  chosen  in 
what  happened  to  be  the  man's  year,  but  at  the  end  of  that  year 
I  was  again  elected,  contrary  to  the  previous  custom,  and  I  re- 


86  PUBLIC  QUESTIONS 

mained  in  that  office  until  the  two  bodies  merged  in  the  National- 
American  Association  in  iSpo.1 

After  the  two  associations  united  there  was  a  feeling  that  the 
management  should  be  more  exclusively  in  the  hands  of  women, 
which  was  indeed  quite  natural.  I  therefore  dropped  out  of 
active  participation  in  their  work,  though  I  afterwards  spoke  at 
some  of  their  meetings  and  still  continued  to  be  active  in  the 
movement  in  other  ways.  I  was  acting  chairman  of  the  Com 
mittee  on  Suffrage  at  the  Congress  Auxiliary  to  the  World's  Fair 
at  Chicago  in  1893,  and  was  much  embarrassed  when,  at  a  mass 
meeting  in  the  Art  Institute  at  which  Susan  B.  Anthony  presided, 
she  requested  me  to  rise  so  that  she  might  show  the  audience  the 
man  who  had  been  president  of  the  American  Association  and 
who  had  done  so  much  in  various  ways  for  equal  suffrage!  I  never 
felt  quite  so  sheepish  as  when  thus  exhibited. 

Miss  Anthony  was  not  always  tactful,  but  she  had  a  high  qual 
ity  of  another  sort:  a  sturdy  honesty  in  saying  the  thing  she  meant 
and  the  thing  she  considered  right,  whether  or  not  it  was  palatable 
and  appropriate.  Her  predominant  characteristic  was  her  daunt 
less  moral  courage.  She  died  March  13,  1906,  without  seeing  the 
accomplishment  of  all  she  had  striven  for,  although  she  plainly 
saw  the  beginning  of  the  end — the  enactment  of  laws  granting  to 
married  women  power  over  their  property  and  children,  as  well  as 
limited  political  rights  in  many  states,  and  the  full  right  of  suffrage 
in  a  few  of  the  newer  states  of  the  West.  Since  her  death  she  has 
become  even  more  widely  known  than  in  her  lifetime  on  account 
of  the  constitutional  amendment  which  bears  her  name. 

I  cannot  leave  this  subject  without  relating  an  incident,  which, 
while  it  has  no  direct  relation  to  woman's  suffrage,  occurred  in 
connection  with  one  of  the  meetings  of  the  American  Woman's 
Suffrage  Association. 

While  attending  an  annual  convention  of  that  Association  held 
at  Minneapolis,  Mrs.  Julia  Ward  Howe  and  I  had  been  asked  to 
go  over  to  St.  Paul  one  evening  and  speak.  There  was  no  hall 


1The  convention  where  this  was  done  was  held  in  Washington. 
Mrs.  Stanton  delivered  the  final  annual  address  for  the  National  and 
I  for  the  American.  (See  Appendix  II.) 


CIVIL  SERVICE  REFORM  87 

available,  and  those  in  charge  of  the  meeting  had  secured  for  us 
a  Jewish  synagogue.  The  train  brought  us  to  the  city  nearly  an 
hour  before  the  meeting,  and  on  going  to  the  synagogue  Mrs. 
Howe  and  I  found  the  rabbi  and  his  two  sons  putting  wood  into 
the  stove  on  the  lower  floor  in  order  to  heat  the  room  above. 
After  they  had  finished,  the  rabbi  began  to  talk  with  me,  and  he 
asked  me  among  other  things  if  I  was  acquainted  with  Felix  Adler. 
I  told  him  that  Dr.  Adler  had  been  a  student  at  Columbia  College 
when  I  was  there  and  that  I  knew  him  well.  Whereupon  he  said 
to  me,  "That  is  a  very  fine  young  man.  He  was  the  son  of  the 
Rabbi  Adler  of  the  Temple  on  Fifth  Avenue.  Do  you  know 
what  was  the  salary  of  the  rabbi  of  that  Temple?  It  was  ten 
thousand  dollars  a  year.  Now  this  young  man  graduated,  as  you 
know,  at  Columbia  College  and  was  then  sent  to  Germany  to  com 
plete  his  education.  He  was  a  young  man  of  great  talent,  and 
it  was  generally  understood  that  when  his  father  retired  he  would 
succeed  him.  But  when  he  came  back  from  Europe  a  reception 
was  held  for  him,  and  what  do  you  think  the  young  man  did? 
He  told  the  members  of  that  congregation  that  he  could  no  longer 
believe  in  the  faith  of  his  fathers.  Now  I  was  very  sorry  for 
that,  but  I  want  to  tell  you,  Mr.  Foulke,  that  was  a  very  honest 
young  man  who  could  throw  away  ten  thousand  dollars  a  year 
just  for  the  sake  of  telling  the  truth!11 

Some  years  afterwards  Dr.  Adler  came  to  spend  a  day  or  two 
with  me  at  Richmond,  and  I  told  him  the  story.  He  smiled,  but 
did  not  deny  it. 


CIVIL   SERVICE   REFORM 

The  public  question  to  which  I  have  given  more  attention  thaw 
to  any  other  is  Civil  Service  Reform.  I  began  to  take  part  in 
the  movement  for  this  reform  shortly  after  the  enactment  of  the 
Pendleton  Law,  and  my  interest  and  activities  in  it  have  con 
tinued  up  to  the  present  time. 

Since  an  account  of  these  activities  has  already  been  given  in  a 
previous  book,2  they  will  not  be  considered  here  in  detail. 

2  "Fighting  the  Spoilsmen,"  Putnam's,   1919. 


88  PUBLIC  QUESTIONS 

It  was  in  1883  that  I  joined  the  National  Civil  Service  Reform 
League  and  became  associated  with  George  William  Curtis,  Carl 
Schurz,  Dorman  B.  Eaton,  and  other  leaders  of  the  move 
ment. 

A  Civil  Service  Reform  Association  was  organised  in  Indiana, 
of  which  I  became  the  first  president.  We  made  a  searching 
investigation  of  the  conditions  in  the  Hospital  for  the  Insane  at 
Indianapolis,  which  was  then  under  political  management  and  in 
which  the  spoils  system  led  to  the  most  horrible  abuses  of  the 
helpless  patients.  After  years  of  controversy,  in  which  the  ques 
tion  was  repeatedly  made  a  political  issue,  this  partisan  system 
was  at  last  overthrown. 

Our  association  also  investigated  the  Federal  service  of  In 
diana  under  President  Cleveland,  who  had  inaugurated  a  system 
of  removals  of  Republicans  from  office  under  secret  charges  and 
had  permitted  other  abuses.  Mr.  Lucius  B.  Swift  and  I  appeared 
before  a  Senate  Committee  and  reported  the  results  of  our 
enquiries. 

Cleveland's  shortcomings  in  regard  to  the  Civil  Service  had 
much  to  do  with  the  election  of  General  Harrison  as  his  suc 
cessor.  But  Harrison  disappointed  us  still  more.  The  removals 
upon  secret  charges  (which  he  had  denounced  before  his  election) 
were  continued  under  his  administration,  and  the  political  changes 
made  in  the  Federal  service  were  all  but  universal. 

I  was  appointed  chairman  of  an  investigating  committee  of 
the  National  League  and  spent  a  winter  in  Washington  enquiring 
into  the  condition  of  the  Federal  service,  which  was  in  many  re 
spects  deplorable.  We  published  our  conclusions,  and  these  were 
not  without  influence  in  the  presidential  campaign  in  which  Har 
rison  was  defeated.  During  his  second  term  Mr.  Cleveland  made 
numerous  and  highly  important  additions  to  the  classified  lists 
and  in  other  ways  showed  his  friendship  for  the  competitive  sys 
tem,  but  when  McKinley  followed  there  was  again  a  period  of 
reaction.  I  was  once  more  made  chairman  of  an  investigating 
committee,  and  we  published  nine  reports  showing  serious  short 
comings.  When,  after  McKinley's  death,  Roosevelt  succeeded, 
I  became  one  of  the  Civil  Service  Commissioners  and  took  part 
in  many  extensions  and  improvements  of  the  classified  system, 


PROPORTIONAL  REPRESENTATION  89 

until,  in  1903,  I  was  compelled  to  relinquish  my  position  on  ac 
count  of  failing  health. 

Mr.  Taft,  who  followed  Roosevelt,  was  very  friendly  to  the 
law,  but  was  sometimes  lax  in  enforcing  it,  and  I  made  on  my 
own  account  certain  investigations  and  remonstrances  in  cases  of 
this  kind. 

After  Mr.  Wilson's  election  the  National  Civil  Service  Reform 
League  again  had  up-hill  work,  for  in  spite  of  his  theoretical 
friendliness  to  the  system,  one  class  of  positions  after  another 
was  omitted  from  it  by  Congress  with  his  approval,  and  with  the 
exception  of  Presidential  postmasters  (whose  places  were  made 
competitive  by  executive  order)  a  backward  movement  could  be 
distinctly  observed. 

The  general  advance,  however,  during  all  these  years  has  been 
very  great.  The  classified  system,  which  began  with  about  four 
teen  thousand  places,  has  now  grown  to  many  hundreds  of  thou 
sands.  Political  coercion  and  activity  have  greatly  diminished, 
and  instead  of  this  vast  multitude  of  places  becoming  the  mere 
spoils  of  politics  they  have  been  largely  distributed  among  men 
who  have  shown  by  competitive  tests  that  they  were  the  best 
qualified  for  the  positions  they  sought.  The  system  has  also  been 
extended  to  a  great  number  of  states  and  cities. 

The  work  by  which  this  has  been  accomplished  was  often 
strenuous.  The  abuse  heaped  upon  us  in  early  days  by  the  poli 
ticians  whom  we  were  stripping  of  power  was  venomous  and  long 
continued.  The  scenes  in  which  I  took  part  were  often  pictur 
esque  and  amusing,  and  to  look  back  to-day  upon  the  work  done 
and  its  fortunate  outcome  is  a  source  of  unbounded  satisfaction. 


PROPORTIONAL   REPRESENTATION 

Among  the  various  subjects  discussed  at  the  World's  Suffrage 
Congress  in  1893  was  proportional  representation,  a  system  by 
which  minorities  can  be  represented  in  legislative  bodies  accord 
ing  to  their  size.  A  local  club  had  been  organised  in  Chicago 
to  promote  this  system,  and  one  afternoon  there  was  a  vigorous 
debate  on  the  subject.  It  was  at  this  time  that  I  became  con 
vinced  of  the  importance  of  this  reform. 


9o  PUBLIC  QUESTIONS 

Very  few  Americans  realise  how  clumsy  is  the  district  system 
of  electing  representatives.  It  gives  no  certain  assurance  that 
the  wishes  of  the  people  will  be  represented  at  all.  A  majority 
of  the  electorate  may  be  so  distributed  that  it  cannot  control  the 
majority  of  the  districts.  The  state  of  New  York  can  furnish 
illustrations.  It  has  often  happened  that  the  governor,  elected 
by  the  whole  body  of  the  people,  has  been  a  Democrat,  and  yet 
that  the  Legislature  was  Republican  and  must  have  misrepresented 
the  political  views  of  the  voters.  Under  the  district  system  this 
could  not  be  avoided,  for  the  great  Democratic  majorities  were 
massed  in  the  city  of  New  York,  and  the  representatives  elected 
by  these  were  more  than  offset  by  those  chosen  by  the  slenderer 
Republican  majorities  in  other  parts  of  the  state. 

This  is  bad  enough  where  no  conscious  effort  is  made  to  pre 
vent  fair  representation,  but  it  becomes  worse  when  the  party 
temporarily  in  power  purposely  arranges  the  districts  in  such  a 
manner  as  to  give  itself  thirty,  forty,  or  fifty  per  cent  more  places 
than  it  is  justly  entitled  to  and  thus  retains  control  of  a  legis 
lative  body,  although  defeated  by  a  popular  vote.  This  is  simply 
usurpation  under  the  forms  of  law. 

Again,  since  the  different  sections  of  the  state  or  city  con 
tinually  change  in  population,  frequent  readjustments  are  neces 
sary  and  reapportionments  take  place  at  stated  periods  a  few 
years  apart  with  the  same  wearisome  political  struggle  between 
the  parties,  the  one  in  power  seeking  to  take  unfair  advantage  of 
its  opponent. 

The  district  system  prevents  the  normal  and  healthy  union  of 
those  who  think  alike  and  desire  to  vote  for  the  same  candidate. 
These  are  now  separated  from  each  other  by  arbitrary  lines  and 
are  often  prevented  from  acting  together.  There  is  no  law  to 
prevent  men  from  uniting  to  build  ships  and  railroads  to  the 
extent  of  their  capital.  But  here  we  have  a  law  which  says  to 
the  voters,  "You  shall  not  combine  your  voting  capital — your 
ballots — unless  you  all  live  in  the  same  district."  What  should 
we  think  of  a  rule  dividing  the  stockholders  of  a  great  railroad 
company  by  geographical  lines  and  prohibiting  those  residing  in 
different  districts  from  voting  for  the  same  directors? 

The  district  system  offers  special  facilities  for  corruption  in 


PROPORTIONAL  REPRESENTATION  91 

the  shape  of  certain  closely  contested  districts  where  the  change 
of  a  few  votes  will  secure  a  different  representative  and  the  change 
of  a  few  representatives  will  change  the  character  of  the  Legisla 
ture.  The  vote-buyer  confines  his  activities  to  these  "pivotal" 
districts.  Here  a  hundred  purchased  votes  are  of  more  political 
value  than  a  thousand  freely  given  elsewhere.  If  districts  were 
abolished  and  representation  were  proportional,  the  vote-buyer 
could  not  purchase  a  larger  proportion  of  legislators  than  would 
be  represented  by  the  votes  he  bought. 

Another  evidence  of  the  crudity  of  our  present  method  is  seen 
in  the  great  number  of  wasted  votes.  Under  the  district  system 
these  generally  amount  to  nearly  half,  and  in  some  cases  to  more 
than  half,  of  the  whole.  If  I  am  a  Republican  and  a  Democrat 
is  elected  in  my  district,  my  vote  has  been  in  vain.  This  is 
unnecessary.  Under  Proportional  Representation  nearly  every 
vote  counts  in  electing  a  proportionate  number  of  representatives 
from  each  minority  party. 

Another  objection  to  small  districts  (and  districts  electing  a 
single  member  are  the  smallest  possible)  is  that  they  lead  to  the 
election  of  small  men.  A  man  of  ability  and  reputation  will  be 
reluctant  to  be  the  mere  representative  of  the  fifth  ward,  but  he 
would  take  a  different  view  of  his  office  if  he  were  one  of  the 
representatives  of  a  whole  city.  Proportional  representation  will 
produce  broader  men,  and  they  will  act  upon  broader  principles. 
Moreover,  the  district  system  has  led  to  the  custom  that  the  mem 
ber  elected  must  reside  within  the  district  he  represents.  In  some 
cases,  indeed,  this  is  required  by  law.  The  result  is  that  the 
choice  of  available  candidates  is  needlessly  restricted. 

There  is  another  reason  why  the  present  system  is  likely  to  lead 
to  the  choice  of  inferior  men.  The  principal  question  considered 
when  a  candidate  is  nominated  is  his  availability — how  many 
votes  will  he  poll?  The  man  who  has  taken  a  leading  and  aggres 
sive  part  in  public  affairs  treads  upon  many  toes  and  makes  many 
enemies,  so  a  candidate  must  be  chosen  who  will  not  awaken  oppo 
sition,  an  agreeable  man,  a  commonplace  man,  who  keeps  a  safe 
position  upon  the  fence.  The  district  system  fastens  servility  upon 
the  representative.  Proportional  representation,  upon  the  other 
hand,  stimulates  independence  and  leadership,  for  if  a  member  can 


92  PUBLIC  QUESTIONS 

retain  a  single  group  who  prefer  him  to  his  competitors  he  can 
still  be  elected,  however  unpopular  he  may  be  to  all  others,  and 
he  can  thus  remain  true  to  his  convictions.  Proportional  repre 
sentation  thus  leads  to  the  election  of  abler  and  more  independ 
ent  men. 

The  main  objection  to  proportional  representation  is  that  if 
every  phase  of  thought  is  thus  allowed  to  appear  in  the  repre 
sentative  body,  this  body  will  always  be  made  up  of  groups,  no 
one  of  which  can  control  its  action  or  be  responsible  for  its  legis 
lative  policy,  and  that  some  small  group  may  hold  the  balance  of 
power,  whereas  an  absolute  majority  one  way  or  the  other  is 
desirable. 

But  is  this  the  fact?  For  executive  and  administrative  pur 
poses  unity  is  necessary  to  good  government;  but  is  an  absolute 
majority  in  a  deliberative  assembly  desirable  if  there  be  no  such 
majority  among  the  people  at  large?  For  legislative  action  we 
need  diversity;  deliberation  induces  compromises  and  the  com 
parison  of  different  ideas  is  necessary  for  the  best  result. 

By  the  present  system  these  compromises  are  made,  before  the 
election,  within  the  two  great  parties  and  amid  the  excitement 
of  a  political  convention.  When  proportional  representation  is 
adopted,  those  compromises  will  be  made  in  the  legislative  body 
itself  where  all  can  see  more  clearly  the  strong  and  the  weak 
points  of  every  claim.  Small  factions  may  occasionally  control 
the  balance  of  power  and  get  more  than  they  are  entitled  to,  but 
this  will  only  be  the  case  where  there  is  some  greater  issue  be 
tween  the  larger  parties  which  compels  the  relinquishment  of  a 
smaller  thing  for  the  sake  of  obtaining  a  greater  thing.  The  fair 
est  compromises  are  most  likely  to  be  made  when  all  phases  of 
popular  thought  are  proportionately  represented. 

This  kind  of  representation  is  particularly  valuable  in  munici 
palities,  where  it  offers  the  best  means  of  divorcing  local  govern 
ment  from  national  politics.  If  groups  are  chosen  in  the  City 
Council  each  representing  some  particular  point  of  view,  which 
will  be  largely  upon  local  questions,  business  administration  will 
naturally  take  the  place  of  political  administration. 

It  is  astonishing  to  any  one  who  studies  the  subject  to  see  how 
admirably  the  systems  of  proportional  representation  established 


PROPORTIONAL  REPRESENTATION  93 

in  the  Swiss  cantons  and  municipalities,  as  well  as  in  Belgium, 
Denmark,  and  other  places,  have  secured  the  desirable  results 
above  set  forth.  I  could  not  fail  to  be  interested  in  a  movement 
which  promised  to  eliminate  so  many  evils,  and  I  accordingly 
became  an  active  supporter  of  proportional  representation. 

On  the  invitation  of  Dr.  Felix  Adler  I  spoke  on  November 
1 2th,  1893,  before  the  Society  of  Ethical  Culture  at  Carnegie 
Hall,  New  York,  upon  that  subject,  and  two  days  later  I  had 
a  joint  discussion  at  the  Nineteenth  Century  Club  at  Sherry's 
with  Judge  William  J.  Gaynor,  afterwards  mayor  of  New  York. 

The  New  York  papers  published  editorials  on  the  subject,  and 
those  interested  in  the  movement  thought  this  would  be  a  good 
opportunity  to  organise  a  society  to  advocate  proportional  repre 
sentation.  Accordingly  an  invitation  to  a  dinner  given  by  the 
promoters  3  of  this  plan  was  sent  me,  and  we  discussed  the  subject 
in  detail.  Within  a  short  time  as  a  result  of  this  conference  the 
Proportional  Representation  Society  of  New  York  was,  created 
with  Mr.  Simon  Sterne  as  president. 

In  the  meantime  a  national  organisation,  the  American  Pro 
portional  Representation  League,  had  been  formed  in  Chicago, 
and  I  was  made  president.  By  the  untiring  efforts  of  Stoughton 
Cooley,  the  secretary,  The  Proportional  Representation  Review, 
a  quarterly  magazine,  was  regularly  issued  for  a  number  of  years. 
It  contained  valuable  articles  not  only  from  prominent  Americans, 
but  also  from  many  foreign  contributors. 

Some  two  years  after  the  organisation  of  the  League  a  conven 
tion  was  held  at  Saratoga  which,  after  a  discussion  of  two  days, 
adopted  resolutions  advocating  the  Swiss  system.  Since  that  time, 
however,  the  Hare  system  has  been  generally  preferred  for  all 
elections  in  which  the  ballots  can  be  conveniently  assembled.4 

3  Horace    E.    Deming,    Thomas    G.    Shearman,    Daniel    S.    Remsen, 
Charles  S.  Fairchild,  Edmond  Kelly,  Oscar  S.  Straus,  Wm.  W.  Ivins, 
Simon    Sterne,   Alfred   Bishop   Mason,  Felix  Adler,   and   Dorman   B. 
Eaton. 

4  For  the  details   of  the  various  systems   see  "Proportional  Repre 
sentation,"  by  John  R.  Commons,  pp.  114,  119,  et  seq.,  and  the  Model 
City  Charter  prepared  by  the  National  Municipal  League,  1916.     Also 
see  a  special  supplement  of  the  Proportional  Representation  Review, 
January,  1919. 


94  PUBLIC  QUESTIONS 

The  work  of  the  League  was  conducted  mainly  by  correspond 
ence,  and  the  Association  has  been  continued  down  to  the  present 
time.  Its  successive  secretaries  have  shown  remarkable  energy; 
the  present  incumbent,  Mr.  C.  G.  Hoag,  of  Haverford,  has  liter 
ally  devoted  his  life  to  this  cause,  and  it  is  mainly  due  to  his 
unremitting  labours  and  to  those  of  Prof.  Augustus  Raymond 
Hatton  of  the  Western  Reserve  University  that  the  Hare  system 
has  been  introduced  and  successfully  carried  on  in  Ashtabula, 
Ohio;  Sacramento,  California,  and  elsewhere. 

The  importance  of  Proportional  Representation  has  become 
much  greater  since  the  growth  of  the  Soviet  government  in  Russia 
and  the  threat  to  existing  institutions  caused  by  the  propagation 
of  Bolshevik  principles.  It  seems  to  offer  a  satisfactory  solution 
for  the  claims  of  those  who  insist  that  various  trades  or  guilds 
should  be  represented  rather  than  mere  geographical  units.  It 
does  not,  however,  make  such  trades  or  guilds  the  only  basis  of 
representation.  Each  citizen,  be  he  farmer,  business  man  or 
workman,  may  unite  with  those  of  his  own  neighbourhood,  his 
own  trade,  his  own  class,  his  own  race,  or  his  own  mode  of 
thinking  in  other  matters,  just  as  he  will,  without  being  forced 
into  any  particular  kind  of  combination.  Constituencies  thus 
form  themselves  and  constantly  adapt  themselves  to  new  require 
ments,  and  the  legislative  or  governing  body  is  composed  of  all 
these  groups  in  proportion  to  their  actual  numbers,  and  can  really 
speak  for  the  people  in  the  way  they  desire.  The  legislative  body 
becomes  like  the  image  in  a  camera  representing  the  whole  public, 
reduced  in  size  to  the  limits  required  for  deliberation. 

In  1921  I  retired  from  the  presidency  of  the  League,  being 
succeeded  by  Mr.  Richard  S.  Childs,  who  had  been  long  con 
nected  with  the  Short  Ballot  movement  and  with  the  work  of 
the  National  Municipal  League. 

THE  RUSSIAN   QUESTION 

I  became  greatly  interested  in  the  history  of  Russia,  especially 
in  the  events  showing  the  encroachments  of  that  empire  in  the 
Balkan  peninsula,  in  Central  Asia,  and  in  the  Far  East.  In  1887 
I  published  a  monograph  entitled  "Slav  and  Saxon"  in  Putnam's 


THE  RUSSIAN  QUESTION  95 

Series  of  "Questions  of  the  Day,"  showing  what  then  seemed  the 
menace  of  the  autocracy  to  free  institutions.  There  were  after 
wards  two  revised  editions  of  this  book  bringing  the  historical 
review  down  to  1904. 

It  was  about  the  time  of  the  publication  of  the  first  edition 
that  Russia  submitted  to  America  the  proposal  for  a  new  treaty 
for  the  extradition  of  criminals  providing  that  murder  or  man 
slaughter,  comprising  the  wilful  or  negligent  killing  of  the  sover 
eign  or  chief  magistrate  of  the  state  or  any  member  of  his  family 
as  well  as  an  attempt  to  commit  or  participate  in  said  crimes, 
should  not  be  considered  an  offence  of  a  political  character. 

This  treaty  was  signed  and  submitted  to  the  Senate  for  ratifi 
cation.  It  seemed  evident  to  me  that  under  these  words,  appar 
ently  so  reasonable,  the  Russian  Government  would  soon  ask  the 
United  States  to  surrender  all  persons  suspected  of  revolutionary 
designs. 

Now  extradition  ought  to  be  allowed  only  when  the  legislation 
of  the  state  which  demands  it  conforms  to  the  principles  adopted 
by  civilised  nations.  In  respect  to  political  trials,  Russian  juris 
prudence  did  not  conform  to  these;  no  jury  was  allowed;  the  trial 
was  by  a  military  tribunal ;  the  accused  was  not  entitled  to  repre 
sentation  except  by  some  officer  of  the  army  who  held  his  place 
and  his  life  subject  to  the  disposition  of  the  government;  the  trial 
was  secret,  and  the  judgment  and  sentence  were  frequently  pre 
scribed  beforehand.  Even  if  the  accused  were  acquitted  he  was 
by  no  means  discharged,  but  might  be  transported  by  mere  admin 
istrative  order  to  the  most  inhospitable  regions  of  Siberia. 

Russia  wanted  the  United  States  Government  to  declare  that 
the  revolutionary  movement  in  Russia  had  no  political  meaning, 
and  that  any  attempt  which  should  endanger  the  Czar's  life,  even 
for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  constitutional  government,  should  be 
regarded  as  simply  a  plot  to  commit  murder.  This  was  a  con 
cession  that  the  Russian  Government  had  not  yet  got  from  any 
of  the  powers,  except  Germany  and  Austria.  England  had  re 
mained  true  to  its  traditional  policy,  and  had  refused. 

I  urged  these  considerations  in  a  circular  letter  addressed  to 
each  of  the  Senators.  I  had  very  earnest  co-operation  from  David 
Turpie,  one  of  the  Senators  from  Indiana,  and  for  a  time  the 


g6  PUBLIC  QUESTIONS 

effort  to  secure  the  ratification  of  the  proposed  treaty  was  defeated, 
but  six  years  afterwards,  under  the  administration  of  President 
Harrison,  it  was  accomplished.5 

I  cannot  but  regard  this  treaty  to-day  as  one  of  the  most  dis 
honourable  episodes  in  the  history  of  American  diplomacy.  Our 
government  was  anxious  to  retain  the  friendship  of  Russia,  espe 
cially  in  view  of  the  Behring  Sea  arbitration  in  Paris,  which  was 
then  pending,  but  it  paid  too  great  a  price. 

I  afterwards  became  the  president  of  the  "Friends  of  Russian 
Freedom."  This  association  had  no  very  definite  organisation, 
but  acted  as  occasion  offered.  It  was,  I  think,  in  1904,  that  Cath 
erine  Breshkovsky,  the  "Little  Mother  of  the  Revolution,"  who 
had  escaped  from  a  long  exile  in  Siberia,  visited  America.  A 
meeting  was  held  in  Faneuil  Hall  in  her  honour,  at  which  I  pre- 

5  The  following  letter  which  I  received  from  George  Kennan  ex 
plains  the  manner  in  which  it  was  ratified: 

"The  treaty  went  through  in  1893,  not  because  the  public  was  apa 
thetic,  but  because  the  proceedings  of  the  Senate  in  executive  session 
were  kept  so  secret  that  the  public  did  not  even  know  it  was  under 
consideration  until  after  it  had  been  approved.  It  was  ratified  by  the 
Senate  February  6th,  and  the  first  intimation  the  public  had  that 
it  was  even  under  consideration,  was  the  resolution  offered  by  Senator 
Turpie,  in  open  session  of  the  Senate,  February  7th.  Even  then  the 
treaty  was  supposed  to  be  merely  under  consideration,  and  the  fact 
that  it  had  been  ratified  was  not  known  even  as  late  as  April  /th, 
when  some  of  the  strongest  and  best  known  men  in  New  York  united 
in  the  Charles  Adams  protest  to  the  President,  the  Secretary  of  State, 
and  the  Foreign  Relations  Committee  of  the  Senate.  .  .  . 

"The  opposition  to  the  treaty  in  the  country  at  large  was  active, 
unanimous,  and  overwhelming.  A  number  of  State  legislatures  adopted 
resolutions  of  protest,  including  Ohio  and  Illinois;  their  example  was 
followed  by  all  sorts  of  organisations,  including  the  Federation  of 
Labor ;  meetings  were  held  in  all  the  larger  cities ;  and  the  newspapers 
of  the  country  almost  without  exception  denounced  the  treaty  and 
urged  the  Senate  not  to  ratify  it.  I  myself  have  seventy-five  or  a 
hundred  editorials  in  opposition  to  the  treaty  from  the  most  influential 
papers  in  the  country,  and  I  didn't  get  a  tenth  part  of  them.  I  have 
never  known  the  country  to  be  more  united  on  a  question  of  foreign 
policy.  But  all  this  storm  of  protest  came  too  late.  It  didn't  get  under 
way  until  March,  and  the  treaty  was  secretly  ratified  the  first  week  in 
February  before  anybody  knew  that  a  treaty  abandoned  six  years 
earlier  on  account  of  the  opposition  to  it  had  again  been  taken  up." 


THE  NATIONAL  MUNICIPAL  LEAGUE  97 

sided,  and  Mrs.  Julia  Ward  Howe  gave  an  address,  followed  by 
Madame  Breshkovsky,  who  spoke  in  Russian.  There  was  a  great 
audience  which  packed  the  hall,  and  hundreds,  perhaps  thousands, 
were  turned  away.  This  audience  was  composed  of  a  motley 
assembly  of  Russians,  Poles,  Bohemians,  and  Jews,  and  when 
Madame  Breshkovsky  rose  to  speak  she  was  greeted  with  frenzied 
enthusiasm.  She  was  followed  by  a  man  who  spoke  in  Polish, 
and  by  another  who  spoke  in  Yiddish,  both  of  these  denouncing 
the  Russian  Government  and  the  existing  ministry  with  great 
bitterness.  These  speeches  too  were  greeted  with  wild  applause. 
Neither  Mrs.  Howe  nor  I  could  understand  a  word  of  them,  and 
when  I  met  her  some  years  afterwards  at  her  Newport  home  (this 
was  our  last  meeting)  I  recalled  these  incidents  to  her  recollec 
tion  and  added,  "I  have  no  doubt  they  said  all  sorts  of  things 
which  you  and  I  wouldn't  approve  of,  and  very  likely  if  we  knew 
it  all  we  might  find  that  we  had  made  fools  of  ourselves."  The 
old  lady,  who  was  then  nearly  ninety  years  of  age,  straightened 
herself  and  said  with  quiet  emphasis,  "We  could  afford  to  make 
very  great  fools  of  ourselves  in  the  cause  of  Russian  freedom." 
I  always  admired  Mrs.  Howe,  but  never  so  much  as  at  that 
moment. 

Some  years  later,  when  I  was  in  Petrograd  and  saw  Professor 
Miliukoff,  the  leader  of  the  Constitutional  party  of  the  Duma, 
he  told  me  that  he  was  in  America  at  the  time  and  knew  of  this 
meeting  in  Faneuil  Hall,  but  that  he  would  not  have  dared  attend 
such  a  meeting  himself;  that  if  he  had  done  so  he  could  never 
have  returned  to  Russia.  He  said  he  hoped  the  Russian  Gov 
ernment  would  not  learn  that  I  had  presided  or  I  would  have 
short  shrift  in  that  empire.  But  nobody  there  found  it  out. 


THE   NATIONAL   MUNICIPAL   LEAGUE 

During  the  early  years  of  the  present  century  I  began  to  be 
much  interested  in  the  work  of  the  National  Municipal  League, 
an  organisation  devoted  to  the  study  of  the  problems  of  city 
government.  James  C.  Carter  of  New  York  was  its  president, 
and  Clinton  Rogers  Woodruff  of  Philadelphia,  its  secretary. 

I  had  attended  a  number  of  conferences  of  the  League,  had 


98  PUBLIC  QUESTIONS 

made  some  addresses  and  taken  part  in  its  discussions,  when  in 
1910,  at  Buffalo,  I  was  elected  president,  succeeding  Charles  J. 
Bonaparte,  who  had  followed  Mr.  Carter  in  that  office.  I  re 
mained  at  the  head  of  this  organisation  for  five  years,  although 
Mr.  Woodruff,  the  secretary,  was  always  the  responsible  director 
of  the  work.6 

The  most  important  work  of  the  League  during  this  period 
was  the  preparation  of  a  new  municipal  programme,  including 
proposed  constitutional  amendments  and  a  model  charter,  A 
committee  was  appointed  for  this  purpose,  of  which  I  was  made 
chairman.7  We  prosecuted  our  work  assiduously  for  two  years, 
completing  our  labours  in  December,  1915,  after  which  our  pro 
gramme  was  submitted  by  a  referendum  to  all  the  members  of 
the  League  (over  two  thousand  in  number),  by  whom  it  was 
finally  adopted.8 

The  charter  and  amendments  which  we  recommended  embodied 


6  I  delivered  each  year  the  annual  address.     The  first  of  these  was 
at  the  meeting  at  Richmond,  Virginia,  November,  1911,  describing  the 
city  government   of   Frankfort-on-the-Main,   of   which   I   had  made   a 
comprehensive  study  while  in  Germany  the  preceding  summer.     The 
second    was    on    "Expert    City    Management"    in    July,    1912,    at    Los 
Angeles,    to    which    place    we    had    been    invited    by    the    Mayor    and 
Council  to  give  them   advice   as  to  the  provisions   of   a  new   charter 
which  was  then   being  framed  by  a  special   charter  commission ;   the 
third  was  on  "Public  Opinion,"  at  a  meeting  held  in  Toronto,  Canada, 
in   1913;  the   fourth,   delivered  at  Baltimore  in   November,   1914,   de 
scribed  the  recent  development  of  city  government  in  America;   the 
fifth,    my   valedictory,    was    at    Dayton    in    November,    1915.      It    was 
entitled  "Coming  of  Age,"  since  the  League  was  then  twenty-one  years 
old,  and  in  it  I  reviewed  the  work  of  the  organisation  and  the  gen 
eral  municipal  progress  in  the  country  during  this  period. 

These  addresses  will  be  found  in  various  numbers  of  the  National 
Municipal  Review. 

7  The    other   members    were   A.    Lawrence    Lowell,    Clinton    Rogers 
Woodruff,  Richard  S.  Childs,  Delos  F.  Wilcox,  M.  N.  Baker,  Mayo 
Fessler,  Robert  Treat  Paine,  and  Professors  William  Bennett  Munro, 
A.  R.  Hatton,  John  A.  Fairlie  and  Hermann  G.  James. 

8  The  provisions  of  this  programme  are   fully  discussed  in  a  book 
entitled  "A  New  Municipal   Program,"   containing  articles  written  by 
various   members    of   the   committee   and   edited   by    C.    R.   Woodruff 
(D.  Appleton  &  Co.,  1919). 


THE  NATIONAL  MUNICIPAL  LEAGUE        99 

in  concrete  form  the  constant  development  in  public  opinion  that 
had  been  going  on  since  1899 — first,  in  favour  of  giving  cities 
greater  power  in  framing  and  amending  their  charters  and  ad 
ministering  their  governments;  second,  in  the  abandonment  of 
the  so-called  federal  plan  with  its  checks  and  balances  in  favour 
of  a  system  of  simpler  and  more  responsible  government  with  a 
city  manager  as  the  administrative  head ;  third,  in  the  employment 
of  experts  selected  upon  proper  Civil-Service  tests  and  without 
reference  to  politics;  fourth,  in  the  attempt  to  give  the  people  a 
more  direct  control  of  the  government  by  open  primaries,  by  the 
preferential  vote  or  by  proportional  representation,  by  a  non- 
partisan  ballot  and  by  the  initiative,  referendum  and  recall. 

At  the  annual  meeting  in  Dayton,  Ohio,  in  November,  1915,  our 
work  on  the  model  charter  being  completed  and  my  health  being 
poor,  I  declined  a  re-election  to  the  presidency  of  the  League  and 
was  succeeded  by  Mr.  Lawson  Purdy,  who  was  perhaps  the  best 
expert  in  the  country  in  matters  of  city  finance  and  taxation  and 
was  eminently  qualified  to  take  up  the  work  on  these  subjects 
which  then  seemed  to  lie  more  immediately  before  us.  Mr.  Purdy 
was  afterwards  succeeded  by  Charles  E.  Hughes,  who  resigned 
when  he  became  Secretary  of  State  under  President  Harding,  and 
was  followed  by  Henry  M.  Waite,  who  had  been  city  manager  of 
Dayton. 


CHAPTER  VI 

POLITICAL  ACTIVITIES— IMPERIALISM 

• 

LAND  of  my  heart, 

What  future  is  before  thee?     Shall  it  be 
To  lie  at  ease,  content  with  thy  bright  past, 
Heedless  of  all  the  world,  till  idleness 
Relax  thy  limbs,  and  swoln  with  wealth  and  pride, 
Thou  shalt  abandon  justice  and  the  poor? 
Or  shalt  thou,  reawakened,  scatter  wide 
The  glorious  tidings  of  a  liberty 
That  lifts  the  latch  of  opportunity, 
First  to  thy  children — then  to  all  mankind? 

— Ad  Patriam. 
See  infra,  pp.  106,  107. 

EARLY   POLITICAL   AFFILIATIONS 

As  the  home  of  my  childhood  had  been  one  of  the  stations  of 
the  Underground  Railway  at  which  we  occasionally  helped  fugi 
tive  negroes  on  their  way  to  liberty,  we  were  naturally  much  inter 
ested  in  the  Slavery  question,  and  took  some  part  in  Anti- 
Slavery  propaganda.  I  often  heard  the  leaders  of  this  move 
ment  in  their  public  addresses  and  have  a  very  vivid  recollection 
of  the  superb  oratory  of  Wendell  Phillips.  No  one  who  has 
ever  listened  to  him  can  forget  the  effect  of  his  wonderful  deliv 
ery.  It  was  not  like  that  of  any  other  man.  It  was  statuesque. 
I  have  seen  him  stand  quietly  before  an  audience,  with  one  hand 
behind  his  back,  making  hardly  a  gesture  with  the  other,  his  eyes 
nearly  closed,  speaking  in  a  low,  perfectly  clear  and  rather  mo 
notonous  voice,  words  that  made  your  blood  run  cold.  It  was 
not  that  these  words  were  in  themselves  always  sound  and  rea 
sonable.  He  used  to  "gibbet"  the  apologists  for  Slavery  and 
sweep  millions  of  guilty  souls  "into  the  Gulf"  with  most  remorse 
less  eloquence.  It  was  said  of  him  that  he  often  uttered  the 
philosophy  of  the  fishwife  in  the  language  of  the  philosopher. 

100 


EARLY  POLITICAL  AFFILIA TJONS  ..,,,,    ,1,0; 

But  while  he  was  speaking,  conviction  was  inevitable.  The  last 
occasion  on  which  I  remember  hearing  him  was  at  a  meeting 
when  the  Anti-Slavery  Society  was  dissolved.  Theodore  Tilton, 
Lucretia  Mott  and  a  number  of  others  had  spoken;  Phillips  con 
fined  himself  to  one  reminiscence,  that  of  a  former  meeting  of  the 
Society  which  was  interrupted  by  the  entrance  of  Marshal  Isaiah 
Rynders  and  a  troop  of  New  York  thugs  and  "plug-uglies."  He 
told  of  a  little  Quaker  iady  sitting  on  the  platform  who,  seeing 
her  grandson  among  those  trying  to  break  up  the  meeting,  said 
to  him  reproachfully,  "Samuel,  Samuel,  what  is  thee  doing  here?" 
and  he  described  as  no  other  could  have  done  the  discomfiture 
of  the  boy  and  his  companions  and  their  speedy  retreat  from  the 
hall.  There  was  little  in  the  story,  but  the  manner  of  telling 
it,  the  quiet  restraint,  the  clear  enunciation  of  every  word,  were 
such  that,  while  the  other  things  said  on  that  occasion  were 
speedily  forgotten,  this  incident  still  remains. 

When  the  Republican  Party  was  organised  we  did  not  share 
the  views  of  the  extreme  Abolitionists  in  their  demand  for  "abso 
lute,  immediate,  and  unconditional  emancipation,"  but  rather  the 
more  practical  demand  of  the  new  organisation  for  the  exclusion 
of  the  system  from  the  territories  which  were  under  the  control 
of  the  Federal  Government.  During  the  Civil  War  we  were  warm 
supporters  of  Abraham  Lincoln  in  his  great  aims — the  preserva 
tion  of  the  Union  and  the  emancipation  of  the  slaves.  After 
the  war  the  course  of  Andrew  Johnson  filled  us  with  disgust  and 
we  supported  the  Republican  Congress  in  its  policy  of  reconstruc 
tion. 

Besides  these  national  issues  there  were  municipal  questions  in 
which  we  took  a  profound  interest.  I  was  practising  law  in  New 
York  at  the  time  of  the  Tweed  regime  and  still  recall  vividly 
the  effect  of  the  disclosures  of  Tammany's  corruption  in  the  New 
York  Times  which,  with  the  powerful  cartoons  of  Nast,  had  a 
great  influence  upon  public  opinion.  I  was  one  of  the  organisers 
of  "The  Young  Men's  Municipal  Reform  Association,"  which 
took  an  active  part  in  the  campaign  against  the  Tweed  ring,  and  I 
was  afterwards  a  watcher  of  the  count  at  one  of  the  precincts  on 
election  day.  The  Tammany  politicians  had  secured  all  the 
election  officials  in  that  precinct.  When  the  ballots  were  counted, 


T02  POLITICAL  ACTIVITIES 

there  were,  say,  247  for  the  opposing  candidate  and  160  for  the 
Tammany  candidate.  But  the  chief  election  officer  declared  the 
result  exactly  the  reverse,  160  for  the  opposition  and  247  for 
Tammany.  This  was  done  in  a  perfectly  mechanical  way  as  if  the 
conclusion  was  a  matter  of  course,  and  not  one  of  the  election 
officers  appeared  to  notice  it.  I  spoke  up  and  declared  that  the 
figures  were  reversed.  For  a  few  seconds  there  was  apparent 
embarrassment,  and  then,  as  the  tally  sheets  were  still  on  the 
table  before  us  and  there  could  be  no  doubt  about  the  fact,  they 
passed  it  off  as  a  mere  verbal  mistake  and  corrected  the  returns. 
In  how  many  precincts,  if  any,  such  a  simple  plan  was  successful 
I  do  not  know,  but  it  was  not  enough  to  control  the  result,  since 
Tweed  and  his  gang  were  thrown  from  power. 

Being  much  dissatisfied  with  the  administration  of  President 
Grant,  I  attended  the  Liberal  Republican  Convention  of  1872  at 
Cincinnati  in  company  with  a  lot  of  young  fellows  from  the 
Free  Trade  League,  of  which  I  was  then  a  member.  Our  candi 
date  was  Charles  Francis  Adams.  But  when  the  result  of  the 
final  vote  was  the  nomination  of  Horace  Greeley,  the  leading 
champion  of  protection,  we  took  little  further  interest  in  the 
campaign. 

HAYES   AND   GARFIELD   CAMPAIGNS 

When  I  moved  to  Indiana  in  1876,  Rutherford  B.  Hayes,  a 
clean  man,  though  by  no  means  eminent,  was  the  Republican 
standard-bearer,  while  Samuel  J.  Tilden,  whom  I  had  always  con 
sidered  a  crafty  politician,  in  spite  of  his  work  in  the  overthrow 
of  Tammany,  was  the  Democratic  candidate.  I  decided  to  sup 
port  Hayes  and  spoke  at  various  places  in  my  own  neighbour 
hood.  It  was  at  this  time  that  Tilden's  "barrel"  introduced  an 
era  of  political  venality  in  Indiana,  and  the  evil  example  was 
afterwards  successfully  imitated  by  the  Republicans. 

Four  years  later  in  the  contest  between  Garfield  and  Hancock 
I  supported  Garfield,  speaking  in  many  places  throughout  the 
State  and  elsewhere  in  the  Middle  West. 

It  was,  I  think,  during  this  campaign  that  an  incident  occurred 
which  showed  me  more  clearly  than  I  had  ever  imagined  the 


THE  THREE  CLEVELAND  CAMPAIGNS  103 

fierce  animal  passions  which  lie  beneath  our  veneer  of  civilisa 
tion.  I  had  been  asked  to  deliver  a  Republican  speech  in  New 
Madison,  a  town  in  Ohio  about  twenty  miles  distant  from  Rich 
mond.  New  Madison  was  a  strong  Democratic  neighbourhood, 
and  so  intolerant  were  its  people  that  they  had  never  allowed 
a  negro  to  live  among  them.  A  delegation  from  Richmond  went 
over  in  a  special  train.  The  meeting  was  large  and  enthusi 
astic,  but  there  were  surly  faces  in  the  crowd  which  lined  the 
streets  during  our  torchlight  parade.  We  started  home,  and  while 
the  train  was  passing  through  a  cornfield  near  the  town,  some 
shots  rang  out  which  were  fired  at  us  from  the  darkness.  One 
of  them  entered  the  window  at  which  I  was  sitting. 

This  unprovoked  attack  filled  every  one  of  us  with  uncon 
trollable  fury.  Some  one  cried,  "Pull  the  rope."  Not  another 
word  was  spoken,  the  train  stopped,  and  we  rushed  through  the 
cornfield  whence  the  shots  had  come.  We  ran  a  long  way,  nearly 
back  to  the  town,  but  found  no  one;  the  miscreants  had  had 
too  good  a  start.  If  any  one  had  been  caught  in  that  field  he 
would  not  have  lived  five  minutes.  I  never  would  have  dreamed 
it  possible  that  I  could  have  felt  as  I  did  feel  during  the  time 
of  that  pursuit.  The  psychology  of  a  multitude  on  such  an  occa 
sion  is  inconceivable  to  one  who  has  never  known  it.  It  was 
lucky  we  failed  in  our  attempt. 

THE   THREE    CLEVELAND   CAMPAIGNS 

In  1882,  as  we  have  already  seen,  I  was  elected  as  a  Republi 
can  to  represent  Wayne  County  in  the  State  Senate.  Between 
the  first  and  second  session  of  my  term  came  the  Presidential 
contest  between  James  G.  Elaine  and  Grover  Cleveland  in  which, 
as  already  stated,  I  declined  to  take  part. 

Though  I  would  not  support  Mr.  Elaine,  I  can  quite  under 
stand  his  immense  popularity.  I  never  saw  him  but  once.  It  was 
at  the  railroad  station  at  Richmond,  where  the  train  stopped 
for  five  or  ten  minutes,  and  he  spoke  to  us  from  a  box  placed 
against  the  building.  I  think  this  was  during  the  Garfield  cam 
paign,  four  years  prior  to  his  own  nomination;  it  was  only  a 


104  POLITICAL  ACTIVITIES 

word,  but  it  was  extremely  effective.  He  had  been  told,  he  said, 
of  the  dangerous  apathy  and  disaffection  prevailing  in  the  Middle 
West.  He  had  seen  nothing  of  it.  The  country  was  prosperous, 
the  people  were  contented,  no  party  was  ever  thrown  out  of 
power  when  this  was  true,  the  success  of  the  Republicans  at  the 
election  was  beyond  a  doubt.  And  so  indeed  it  proved.  He 
also  asked  the  pointed  question,  "Why  is  it  that  so  many  men 
who  are  free-traders  when  they  leave  school  or  college,  become 
protectionists  in  after  life?" 

Not  only  was  Elaine  personally  very  attractive,  but  as  a 
speaker  he  was  most  tractable  and  satisfactory  to  campaign  man 
agers.  In  this  he  was  quite  different  from  Senator  Roscoe  Conk- 
ling,  who  was  imperious  and  dictatorial.  In  this  same  Garfield 
campaign  he  spoke  at  Richmond.  Prior  to  his  address  he  reviewed 
a  torchlight  procession  from  the  balcony  in  front  of  the  hotel, 
and  our  mayor,  General  Tom  Bennett,  at  whose  side  he  was 
standing,  gave  some  orders  to  those  who  were  below.  Conkling 
tapped  him  on  the  shoulder  and  said,  "Mr.  Mayor,  will  you 
please  let  me  manage  this  demonstration?" 

In  1888  I  supported  Benjamin  Harrison,  the  Republican  can 
didate  against  Grover  Cleveland.  Cleveland  had  bitterly  disap 
pointed  the  Civil  Service  reformers  of  our  State  by  turning  over 
the  offices  to  Democratic  spoilsmen.  He  had  instituted  the  repre 
hensible  custom  of  removing  men  upon  charges  filed  against 
them  secretly  which  they  were  not  permitted  to  see  nor  to 
answer.  I  had  been  associated  with  General  Harrison  in  some 
professional  transactions.  We  were  very  friendly;  I  relied  upon 
his  strong  declarations  in  favour  of  Civil  Service  Reform  and 
took  an  active  part  in  the  campaign  on  his  behalf,  speaking  in 
many  States. 

In  this  campaign,  as  in  that  which  preceded  it,  the  Independ 
ents  turned  the  tide.  There  were  enough  of  us  who  returned  to 
the  support  of  the  Republican  candidate  to  secure  his  election. 
But  Harrison's  administration  was  by  no  means  as  good  as  his 
promises.1 

He  greatly  disappointed  those  Independents  who  were  inter- 

1  For  particulars  see  "Fighting  the  Spoilsmen,"  Putnam's,  1919,  pp. 
46-72. 


THE  THREE  CLEVELAND  CAMPAIGNS  105 

ested  in  Civil  Service  Reform  but  who  were  no  friends  of  the 
high  tariff  policy  of  the  Republican  Party. 

Hence  it  was  that  in  1892  when  the  same  candidates,  Cleve 
land  and  Harrison,  were  nominated,  most  of  the  Independents  now 
preferred  Cleveland.  He  was  elected  by  a  large  majority.  For 
myself,  I  was  so  profoundly  dissatisfied  with  Mr.  Harrison's  short 
comings  in  the  matter  of  Civil  Service  Reform  that  I  criticised 
his  record  with  considerable  asperity  in  an  address  before  the 
Boston  Reform  Club  and  afterwards  in  various  speeches  during 
the  campaign.2 

Mr.  Cleveland's  second  administration,  in  spite  of  some  short 
comings  at  the  outset,  was  far  more  creditable  than  the  first.  He 
made  extensive  additions  to  the  classified  Civil  Service;  he  was 
unflinching  in  the  maintenance  of  law  and  order  when  confronted 
with  the  disorders  and  riots  in  Chicago;  he  upheld  the  credit  of 
the  country  by  his  unswerving  support  of  the  gold  standard.  But 
he  had  estranged  himself  from  his  own  party,  which  sympathised 
with  some  of  the  elements  of  disorder  and  was  in  favour  of  a 
silver  standard  and  the  repudiation  of  public  and  private  obliga 
tions  which  that  involved.  Mr.  William  Jennings  Bryan,  who  had 
come  into  general  prominence  by  his  "Cross  of  Gold"  speech  at 
the  Chicago  Convention  of  1896,  became  the  candidate  of  that 
party  upon  a  free  silver  and  low  tariff  platform,  against  William 
McKinley,  the  Republican  candidate,  who  made  his  campaign 
upon  a  high  tariff  and  gold  standard  platform. 

Moreover,  the  Democratic  Party  demanded  "rotation  in  office" 
and  a  practical  return  to  the  spoils  system.  Although  I  was  not  a 
high  tariff  man,  the  peril  to  the  country  involved  in  a  debased 
currency  and  a  return  to  political  spoils  led  me  to  take  an  eager 
and  active  part  in  the  campaign,  speaking  in  all  parts  of  the 
country  on  behalf  of  the  Republican  candidate.  The  sentiment 
for  free  silver,  which  at  the  outset  was  overwhelming,  was  gradu 
ally  undermined  by  public  discussion,  and  McKinley  was  chosen 
President.  He  was  a  man  of  great  political  tact,  yielding  at  times 
his  own  convictions  to  what  he  believed  to  be  the  demands  of 
the  public.  He  also  conceded  too  much  to  the  spoils  hunters. 
He  endeavoured  at  first  to  keep  us  out  of  the  war  with  Spain, 

2  See  "Fighting  the  Spoilsmen,"  Putnam's,  1919,  pp.  286-294. 


io6  POLITICAL  ACTIVITIES 

but  when  it  was  forced  upon  him  he  assumed  the  leadership  in 
the  struggle  and  directed  its  course,  as  well  as  the  peace  proceed 
ings  at  its  close,  with  ability  and  wisdom. 

It  was  during  his  administration,  and  as  a  consequence  of  the 
war,  that  there  arose  a  new  political  issue  known  as  anti- 
imperialism,  which  played  a  leading  part  in  the  Presidential 
campaign  of  the  year  nineteen  hundred.  The  circumstances  giv 
ing  rise  to  that  issue  were  the  following. 


ANTI-IMPERIALISM 

During  McKinley's  administration,  and  as  one  of  the  conse 
quences  of  the  war  with  Spain,  the  American  forces  had  taken 
possession  of  Manila,  and  the  question  arose,  What  was  to  be 
done  with  the  Philippines?  Admiral  Dewey  could  hardly  have 
sailed  away  and  left  Manila  in  control  of  the  Spaniards  with 
whom  we  were  at  war;  he  therefore  blockaded  the  city.  The 
Government  could  not  leave  him  there  alone,  so  an  army  was 
sent  to  his  support,  and  the  presence  of  our  army  and  navy 
there  contributed  as  much  as  any  other  fact  to  the  speedy 
termination  of  the  war.  Our  manifest  duty  was  to  protect  the 
inhabitants,  including  the  foreign  residents,  so  the  President  took 
the  responsibility  of  keeping  order  until  it  should  be  finally  deter 
mined  what  sort  of  government  was  to  be  established.  In  all 
this,  it  seemed  to  me,  the  President  was  right. 

It  was  at  this  point  that  the  members  of  the  "Anti-Imperialist 
League"  and  others  began  an  agitation  opposing  the  occupation  of 
the  Islands.  A  national  conference  of  men  interested  in  public 
affairs  was  called  to  meet  at  Saratoga  on  August  igth  and  2oth 
to  consider  the  proper  policy  of  the  country  in  regard  to  the 
Philippines.  Carl  Schurz  and  Moorfield  Storey  were  the  princi 
pal  speakers  for  the  Anti-Imperialists.  Mr.  Schurz  spoke  in  the 
afternoon,  I  replied  in  the  evening.  The  audience  was  not  a 
large  one,  but  was  generally  sympathetic  with  the  President's  pol 
icy.  On  the  following  morning  Moorfield  Storey  made  an  earnest 
plea,  urging  that  America  abstain  from  all  interference  with  the 
Philippines,  and  the  audience  called  upon  me  to  reply,  which  I 
did  amid  considerable  enthusiasm.  A  committee  of  some  twenty 


THE  CAMPAIGN  OF  igoo  107 

persons  was  appointed  to  draft  resolutions.     They  were  all  but 
unanimous  in  support  of  the  President's  policy. 

Still  the  agitation  continued.  Letters,  tracts  and  telegrams 
were  sent  in  great  quantities  to  American  soldiers  in  the  Philip 
pines  to  discourage  re-enlistments  and  the  further  prosecution 
of  the  war,  and  at  a  mass  meeting  at  Central  Music  Hall,  Chi 
cago,  there  was  an  outburst  of  oratory  by  professors  and  others 
which  was  distinctly  disloyal  in  a  time  of  war.  Another  meeting 
was  called  a  week  later  at  the  Auditorium  as  a  protest  against  this 
propaganda,  and  I  was  called  upon  with  others  to  address  it.  The 
great  hall  was  filled  with  an  intensely  enthusiastic  audience. 
There  was  much  bitterness  expressed  against  the  sowers  of  dis 
cord,  but  I  confined  my  remarks  mainly  to  a  recital  of  the  his 
toric  series  of  events,  showing  that  the  President  had  taken  the 
only  course  consistent  with  justice  and  reason. 

THE   CAMPAIGN   OF    IQOO 

As  the  campaign  of  1900  approached  it  became  evident  that 
the  Democratic  Party  with  Mr.  Bryan  as  its  leader  was  about  to 
espouse  the  cause  of  the  Anti-Imperialists.  President  McKinley, 
who  had  brought  the  war  to  its  successful  conclusion,  who  had 
settled  the  terms  of  peace  and  determined  the  policy  to  be 
adopted,  was  necessarily  the  Republican  candidate,  and  Theodore 
Roosevelt  was  nominated  for  vice-president.  The  Democratic 
Party  reaffirmed  its  free  silver  doctrines  of  1896.  The  main  con 
tention  was  that  the  Republican  administration  had  been  untrue 
to  the  principles  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence  in  not  imme 
diately  allowing  the  Filipinos  to  govern  themselves  in  their  own 
way. 

I  was  invited  by  the  Republican  managers  in  Indiana  to  make 
the  opening  speech  of  the  campaign  at  English's  Opera  House 
in  Indianapolis,  in  answer  to  an  address  by  Mr.  Bryan,  who  had 
accepted  the  nomination  in  that  city  a  short  time  before.  I  spoke 
to  a  crowded  house,  and  the  address,  discussing  the  meaning  of 
the  Declaration  as  applied  to  self-government  in  the  Philippines, 
was  afterwards  used  as  a  text  by  speakers  elsewhere.  I  now 
entered  upon  the  general  campaign  with  zeal,  speaking  in  many 
parts  of  the  country,  from  Maine  to  the  Mississippi.  I  insisted 


io8  POLITICAL  ACTIVITIES 

that  the  Republicans  had  a  great  advantage  over  the  Democrats 
in  the  fact  that  the  former  could  show  the  results  of  experience, 
while  the  latter  could  offer  nothing  but  promises  and  prophecies, 
and  Mr.  Bryan's  former  prophecies  of  the  calamities  that  would 
follow  the  maintenance  of  the  gold  standard  had  already  been 
discredited. 

Indeed,  the  outcome  could  hardly  be  in  doubt.  McKinley 
and  Roosevelt  were  elected  by  an  overwhelming  majority. 

Then  followed  the  tragedy  at  Buffalo,  and  Roosevelt  succeeded 
to  the  Presidency.  Within  a  few  weeks  thereafter  I  was  called 
to  Washington  as  Civil  Service  Commissioner.  My  high  opinion 
of  the  ability  and  character  of  the  new  President  was  more  than 
confirmed  by  the  close  association  I  had  with  him  while  holding 
that  office. 


CHAPTER  VII 
LIFE  IN  WASHINGTON 

RICH,  opalescent  memories  that  fill 
The  spirit's  eye  at  each  new  turn  of  thought, 
With  some  fresh  tint  of  beauty — fair  emprize, 
And  joy  of  life  and  high  companionship. 

In  October  of  1901  I  moved  with  my  family  to  Washington 
to  take  my  place  as  one  of  the  members  of  the  Civil  Seivice  Com 
mission,  where  I  held  a  position  which,  for  nearly  six  years  had 
been  filled  by  Mr.  Roosevelt  himself.1 

Washington  life  and  Washington  society  were  full  of  charm  at 
this,  their  most  brilliant  period,  and  I  treasure  the  liveliest  recol 
lections  of  the  many  delightful  acquaintances  and  warm  .friends 
I  made  during  my  official  life,  but  far  more  than  anything  else 
do  I  prize  my  close  association  with  the  President. 

THEODORE   ROOSEVELT 

I  had  known  Mr.  Roosevelt  for  some  twelve  years,  having  met 
him  and  spoken  with  him  at  various  meetings  of  the  friends  of 
Civil  Service  Reform.  He  had  been  appointed  Civil  Service  Com 
missioner  by  President  Harrison,  and  I  saw  him  often  in  Wash 
ington  in  1890  and  1891,  where  as  chairman  of  a  special  com 
mittee  of  the  National  Civil  Service  Reform  League  I  was  con 
ducting  an  investigation  into  various  departments  of  the  govern 
ment  under  the  Harrison  administration.  Roosevelt  himself  was 
much  disappointed  with  Harrison  for  his  refusal  to  extend  the 
competitive  system  to  the  Census  Bureau,  which  the  Commission 
had  recommended,  as  well  as  on  account  of  his  failures  to  enforce 
the  law.  Governor  Thompson,  of  South  Carolina,  was  also  a 
member  of  the  Commission,  and  we  three  used  frequently  to 

1  The  circumstances  leading  to  this  appointment  and  the  work  accom 
plished  by  the  Commission  are  set  forth  in  "Fighting  the  Spoilsmen," 
Putnam's,  1919. 

109 


no  LIFE  IN  WASHINGTON 

lunch  together  at  the  "Losekam,"  a  restaurant  on  F  Street,  and 
the  two  Commissioners  sometimes  came  to  see  me  at  my  rooms  on 
Fifteenth  Street. 

One  Sunday  we  happened  to  spend  the  afternoon  there  in  social 
conversation,  but  the  fact  that  we  were  together  came  to  the 
notice  of  the  correspondent  of  the  New  York  World,  who  had  his 
rooms  on  the  floor  above.  That  was  quite  enough,  and  he  sent 
to  his  paper  a  thrilling  account  of  the  two  Commissioners  ap 
pointed  by  President  Harrison  devoting  their  Sunday  afternoon 
to  a  conspiracy  with  a  Civil  Service  reformer  from  the  outside, 
against  the  administration  under  which  they  were  serving! 

I  used  to  dine  with  Mr.  Roosevelt  quite  frequently  in  the  little 
house  on  a  side  street  near  Connecticut  Avenue,  where  he  and 
Mrs.  Roosevelt  were  bringing  up  their  family.  He  was  the  most 
hospitable  of  men  and  one  met  interesting  guests  at  his  table, 
Speaker  Reed,  Henry  Cabot  Lodge,  and  others. 

Reed  was  one  of  the  most  genial  souls  that  ever  enlivened  a 
company.  He  talked  with  dry  sarcasm  about  "the  merit  system," 
a  phrase  which  he  pronounced  with  peculiar  unction,  but  we 
always  had  a  friend  in  him  when  we  wanted  something  done. 

Lodge  was  also  a  supporter  of  the  competitive  system  and 
anxious  to  extend  it  whenever  practicable,  but  he  was  criticised 
and  bitterly  attacked  by  many  of  the  Mugwumps,  especially  in 
Massachusetts,  because  he  still  distributed  the  unclassified  places 
as  patronage.  He  said  very  frankly  that  he  would  do  all  he  could 
to  remove  them  from  the  spoils  system,  but  that  while  they  were 
there  he  proposed  to  make  the  best  use  of  them  he  could.  When 
ever  we  wanted  to  accomplish  anything,  Lodge  was  always  able 
to  get  more  done  and  in  a  shorter  time  than  any  other  man  in 
Congress. 

Sometimes  Mr.  Roosevelt  and  I  would  row  together  up  the  Po 
tomac  to  the  Chain  Bridge,  and  I  remember  one  of  these  occasions 
when  he  was  speaking  of  the  difficulty  which  people  in  various 
ranks  of  life  and  in  various  parts  of  the  great  country  had  in 
understanding  each  other.  "The  man  in  the  New  York  smart 
set,"  he  said,  "finds  it  hard  to  realise  that  a  planter  in  some 
remote  section  of  the  South  may  be  quite  as  perfect  a  gentleman 
as  he  is  himself,  and  the  Southerner,  on  the  other  hand,  finds  it 


THEODORE  ROOSEVELT  in 

hard  to  understand  how  a  man  born  and  reared  in  the  lap  of 
luxury  in  New  York  may  have  just  as  much  personal  courage  as 
he  has.  In  the  same  way  the  man  in  New  England  and  the  man 
in  the  Far  West  cannot  appreciate  each  other's  good  qualities. 
I  am  glad  I  have  had  opportunities  of  seeing  all  sorts  of  people 
in  all  parts  of  the  country,  and  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  I  was 
brought  up  in  the  East,  the  kind  of  life  I  enjoy  most  is  that  out 
on  the  ranch,  where  the  cook  sits  at  the  table  with  me."  This 
feeling  found  its  expression  afterwards  when  he  organised  the 
Rough  Riders. 

He  knew  more  kinds  of  men  than  any  other  person  in  America, 
and  when  he  became  President  this  served  him  in  good  stead.  He 
was  able  to  pick  the  particular  man  he  needed  for  special  work 
better  than  any  Chief  Executive  we  have  ever  had. 

It  was  while  Mr.  Roosevelt  was  Civil  Service  Commissioner 
that  Frank  Hatton,  editor  of  the  Washington  Post,  published  a 
number  of  charges  against  him  and  the  other  Commissioners,  and 
these  were  investigated  by  a  Congressional  committee.  I  attended 
some  of  the  hearings.  The  charges  were  false,  and  Roosevelt  came 
out  with  flying  colours,  although  John  Wanamaker,  then  Post 
master-General,  had  appeared  as  a  witness  against  him.  One 
night  I  was  dining  at  the  Roosevelts'  when  a  subordinate  of  Wana 
maker  came  to  see  him  on  business.  He  stepped  to  the  front 
door  to  talk  with  this  man  a  moment,  and  the  last  words  I  heard 
him  say  before  he  came  back  to  the  table  were,  "You  may  tell 
the  Postmaster-General  from  me  that  I  don't  like  him  for  two 
reasons.  In  the  first  place,  he  has  a  very  sloppy  mind,  and,  in 
the  next  place,  he  doesn't  speak  the  truth." 

After  Mr.  Roosevelt's  six  years  on  the  Civil  Service  Commis 
sion,  I  saw  but  little  of  him,  until,  on  his  return  from  Cuba, 
he  became  a  candidate  for  the  Governorship  of  New  York.  There 
was  one  curious  feature  of  this  campaign.  Some  of  the  New  York 
Independents  who  had  organised  a  Citizens'  League  wanted  Mr. 
Roosevelt  to  become  a  candidate  under  their  auspices.  He  was 
not  willing  to  promise  to  do  this,  and  afterwards,  when  he  became 
the  nominee  of  the  regular  Republican  organisation,  they  vio 
lently  opposed  him  and  nominated  a  candidate  of  their  own, 
who,  however,  received  only  a  few  hundred  votes.  Among  the 


ii2  LIFE  IN  WASHINGTON 

leaders  of  this  movement  was  Mr.  John  Jay  Chapman.  City 
and  State,  an  independent  newspaper  in  Philadelphia  edited  by 
Herbert  Welsh,  with  whom  I  had  been  associated  in  the  National 
Civil  Service  Reform  League,  criticised  Roosevelt  with  some  bit 
terness.  I  was  disgusted  at  the  action  of  this  small  coterie,  and 
on  November  23d,  1898,  I  wrote  the  following  letter: 

MY  DEAR  MR.  ROOSEVELT: 

I  have  just  been  East  and  have  expressed  to  a  number  of  so-called 
reformers,  who  worked  against  your  election  a  few  of  my  ideas  in 
regard  to  the  character  of  their  opposition.  I  saw  J.  J.  Chapman 
and  congratulated  him  upon  the  organisation  of  his  small  and  select 
party  and  admired  the  logic  of  the  men  who,  by  nominating  you,  ex 
pressed  their  conviction  that  you  were  the  best  man  for  the  place,  and 
then  did  all  they  could  to  beat  you  because  you  would  not  wear  their 
collar.  I  had  a  very  earnest  talk  with  Herbert  Welsh,  told  him  I 
thought  the  course  of  City  and  State  toward  you  was  injurious  to  re 
form,  that  its  criticisms  of  you  were  trifling,  and  that  such  folly  made 
men  love  Croker.  Welsh  told  me  that  one  reason  the  paper  took  the 
attitude  it  did  toward  you  was  on  account  of  the  fact  that  you  had 
agreed  not  to  decline  the  nomination  of  the  Citizens'  League  (or  what 
ever  they  call  it)  and  then  had  finally  declined  it,  and  that  Colonel 
Waring  had  written  to  you  after  your  declination  saying  that  he  had 
always  considered  you  a  man  of  honour.  I  asked  Welsh  whether 
he  had  heard  your  side  of  that  story,  and  he  admitted  that  he  had  not, 
but  showed  me  some  copies  of  letters  which  were  said  to  have  been 
written  to  you  during  the  early  part  of  the  negotiations.  I  would  not 
mention  this  matter  at  all  but  for  the  fact  that  it  comes  from  a  man 
who  is  so  earnest  and  sincere  in  all  that  he  does  that  I  thought  you 
ought  to  know  about  it,  and  I  am  sure  he  would  not  object  to  my 
asking  you  how  the  matter  really  stands.  My  only  wonder  is  that  he 
did  not  do  it  himself.  His  approving  quotation  from  Parkhurst  in 
last  week's  City  and  State,  saying  that  the  New  York  election  was 
Platt's  victory  more  than  yours  fills  me  with  great  disgust. 

To  this  Mr.  Roosevelt  replied: 

MY  DEAR  FOULKE: 

Your  letter  really  pleased  me.  The  attitude  of  you  and  Swift  and 
Bonaparte  and  some  others  gave  me  real  satisfaction.  The  attitude  of 
the  bulk  of  our  associates  did  not  much  surprise  me,  but  it  gave  an 
illustration  of  why  it  is  that  they  so  rarely  accomplish  good  results 
and  filled  me  with  gratitude  for  having  myself  kept  within  party  lines. 

Now  you  are  very  welcome  to  show  this  letter  to  Welsh,  whose  hon- 


RIDES  AND  WALKS  WITH  THE  PRESIDENT     113 

esty  and  sincerity  I  entirely  appreciate,  though  what  you  tell  me  of  his 
attitude,  of  which  I  was  ignorant,  shows  that  he  is  suffering  from  pro 
longed  and  excessive  indulgence  in  the  Evening  Post,  which  is  fatal 
to  any  man's  usefulness.  .  .  . 

I  explained  to  them  (the  Citizens'  League)  with  the  greatest  pos 
sible  minuteness  that  I  would  refuse  their  nomination  if  they  asked 
for  an  answer,  and  that  all  I  would  do  was  to  reserve  the  right  of 
accepting  or  rejecting  it.  They  then  issued  an  address,  of  which  I 
did  not  get  a  copy,  and  I  was  informed  that  it  contained  (by  implica 
tion,  at  least)  the  statement  that  I  would  accept.  I  expressed  my  dis 
satisfaction  with  this,  whereupon  one  of  their  number  showed  me  a 
copy  of  the  address,  and  another  wrote  me  a  letter  enclosing  a  copy. 
It  was  marked  at  a  point  running,  "We  do  not  know  whether  he  will 
be  a  candidate  or  not."  This  was  entirely  satisfactory,  and  I  at  once 
said  so  and  wrote  back,  "The  address  is  all  right,"  of  course  referring 
to  the  fact  that  the  address  pledged  me  to  nothing.  They  actually  tried 
to  insist  later  that  I  thereby  pledged  myself  to  the  principles  of  the 
address,  which  contained  a  violent  assault  on  the  Republican  Party,  an 
assault  to  which  neither  they  nor  I  ever  dreamt  for  a  moment  that 
I  would  subscribe.  .  .  . 

It  was  a  satisfactory  thing  to  beat  at  the  same  time,  Blifil'and  Black 
George,  and  I  was  delighted  to  overthrow  Croker  and  Carl  Schurz, 
Dr.  Parkhurst  and  Chief  Devery,  Godkin,  Ottendorfer,  Pulitzer  and 
Hearst:  the  most  corrupt  politicians  within  the  Republican  ranks,  the 
silly  "Goo-Goos"  and  the  extraordinarily  powerful  machine  of  Tam 
many  Hall.  The  great  corporations  also  raised  a  gigantic  corruption 
fund  on  behalf  of  my  opponents. 

Faithfully  yours, 

THEODORE  ROOSEVELT. 

During  McKinley's  administration  I  conferred  with  Mr.  Roose 
velt  a  number  of  times  in  regard  to  the  President's  violations  of 
the  Civil  Service  laws.  He  recommended  McKinley  to  appoint  me 
Civil  Service  Commissioner,  and  one  of  the  first  things  he  did 
in  his  own  administration  was  to  offer  me  a  place  on  the  Com 
mission.  He  had  discussed  it  with  others  even  before  he  left 
Buffalo,  and  it  was  not  many  days  afterwards  that  I  received  a 
telegram  from  him  urging  my  acceptance. 


RIDES   AND  WALKS  WITH   THE  PRESIDENT 

While  I  was  Commissioner  in  Washington  I  saw  a  great  deal 
of  him  both  at  the  White  House  and  in  various  walks  and  rides 


H4  LIFE  IN  WASHINGTON 

around  the  city.  Sometimes  our  horseback  excursions  were  ex 
ceedingly  strenuous.  Once  I  was  riding  with  Mr.  John  R.  Procter, 
the  president  of  the  Civil  Service  Commission,  in  Rock  Creek  Park, 
and  we  had  just  reached  the  top  of  a  bluff  after  making  a  long 
circuit  on  the  carriage  road.  We  looked  over  and  saw  three  men 
on  horseback  scrambling  up  the  side  of  this  bluff,  which  was  there 
very  steep.  "Who  are  those  madcaps?"  exclaimed  Procter,  and  a 
moment  later,  "Good  Lord!  it's  the  President!"  He  was  accom 
panied  by  General  Young  and  followed  by  an  orderly.  In  a  few 
moments  they  reached  the  top,  but  there  was  a  high  fence  and 
they  could  not  get  over.  So  they  galloped  down  again  through  the 
bushes  into  the  ravine.  Then  I  cried  out  that  there  was  a  break 
in  the  fence  further  on,  and  up  they  came  once  more.  When  they 
reached  the  road  the  President  called  to  us,  "Come  along,"  and  we 
did.  He  galloped  down  the  steep  bank,  then  through  gullies  and 
thickets,  and  up  the  bed  of  a  stream,  everywhere  at  full  speed, 
then  across  a  green  field  and  over  a  fence.  Luckily  there  was  an 
open  gate  close  to  the  place  where  he  leaped.  I  looked  to  see 
what  General  Young  would  do.  He  took  the  gate,  and  Procter 
and  I  followed. 

After  I  returned  home  I  related  the  incident  to  Miller,  my 
coachman.  Miller  always  took  a  fatherly  interest  in  my  welfare, 
and  he  asked,  "But,  Mr.  Foulke,  why  didn't  you  leap  the  fence 
after  the  President?"  I  told  him  I  did  not  know  that  Balder 
could  jump.  "But  he  can,"  said  Miller,  "I  have  taught  him.  If 
I  may  go  with  you  some  time  I  will  show  you."  So  we  went  next 
day  to  a  wood  where  there  was  a  huge  log  as  high  as  a  fence 
and  sure  enough  the  horse  leaped  it  without  difficulty,  first  with 
Miller  on  his  back  and  then  with  me,  whereupon  my  coachman 
exclaimed  with  great  satisfaction,  "Now  you  can  ride  anywhere 
with  the  President!" 

There  was  another  occasion  on  which  I  had  the  opportunity  to 
observe  the  muscular  strength  of  the  President  and  his  readiness 
in  an  emergency.  I  was  riding  with  a  Southern  lady,  an  excel 
lent  horsewoman,  through  the  wooded  paths  of  Rock  Creek  Park, 
and  she  was  congratulating  herself  that  there  was  nothing  to  mar 
the  enjoyment  of  the  ride.  Blackamoor  trotted  well,  the  saddle 


RIDES  AND  WALKS  WITH  THE  PRESIDENT      115 

did  not  turn,  her  hat  was  in  no  danger  of  falling  off,  and  even 
the  hairpins  kept  their  places.  We  were  just  passing  a  tree  as 
she  said  this,  and  I  reached  out  my  hand  to  touch  wood,  but 
could  not  do  it.  This  must  have  been  the  portent  which  fore 
shadowed  what  was  to  come.  A  little  further  on  she  remarked 
that  she  would  like  to  see  the  President  when  he  was  not  on 
parade,  and  that  the  only  plan  she  could  think  of  was  to  find  out 
when  I  was  riding  with  him,  and  then  come  up  behind  us,  have 
her  horse  run  away  and  be  rescued  by  him.  About  half  an  hour 
after  this  we  decided  to  take  what  seemed  to  be  a  new  bridle  road 
cut  into  the  bluff  on  the  far  side  of  Rock  Creek.  It  was  in 
fact  only  a  foot-path,  but  a  solid  bridge  had  just  been  con 
structed,  and  the  way  looked  broad,  well-made,  and  very  inviting. 
But  when  we  rode  up  to  a  place  about  twenty-five  or  thirty  feet 
above  the  river,  where  the  bluff  was  nearly  perpendicular,  we  found 
that  the  path,  which  had  become  narrower  and  narrower,  was  at 
last  only  a  few  inches  wide,  until  upon  turning  a  sharp  corner 
we  came  suddenly  upon  a  spot  where  two  logs  spanned  a  small 
chasm.  My  companion  was  riding  ahead,  but  she  could  neither 
turn  nor  dismount,  so  she  urged  her  horse  across  the  logs.  The 
animal,  however,  after  starting,  refused  to  go  further,  became 
frightened,  and  fell  over  backward  down  to  the  creek,  at  least 
twenty-five  feet,  landing  on  his  side,  partly  on  top  of  my 
companion.  She  cried  out  to  me  that  she  was  not  hurt;  but  a 
moment  later,  while  I  was  rushing  down  to  her,  she  asked  me  to 
get  the  horse  off  her  leg.  Before  I  reached  her  he  had  started 
away  into  the  stream.  She  at  first  tried  to  scramble  up  the 
bank,  but  could  not,  and  said  she  must  rest  a  while  and  that 
I  should  go  after  the  horse.  I  plunged  into  the  river  in  pursuit, 
but  could  not  catch  him  for  some  time.  At  last  I  secured 
and  tied  him  and  then  waded  back  across  the  creek  to  my 
companion,  who  had  by  this  time  scrambled  on  her  hands 
and  knees  up  to  the  path.  Two  policemen  were  now  seen  ap 
proaching;  one  of  them,  an  old  fellow,  made  a  cheerful  begin 
ning  by  telling  us  that  we  ought  to  have  had  better  sense  than 
to  take  that  path.  He  helped  us,  however,  by  slowly  backing 
the  horse  I  had  been  riding  down  the  narrow  path,  while  the 


n6  LIFE  IN  WASHINGTON 

other  policeman  went  for  my  companion's  horse  across  the  stream. 
Soon  we  had  a  "round  up"  with  Gifford  Pinchot,  General  Crozier, 
and  a  lot  of  policemen,  at  Pierce's  Mill,  not  far  away. 

We  were  discussing  how  to  get  back  home,  as  my  companion 
was  badly  bruised,  when  suddenly  the  President,  at  the  head  of 
some  other  horsemen,  dashed  up  to  the  party  and  asked  what  was 
the  matter.  I  introduced  the  lady  and  told  him  what  had  hap 
pened.  He  leaped  to  the  ground  and  at  once  took  command.  He 
asked  her  if  she  could  ride  home.  She  said  she  could  if  once  on 
the  horse,  but  that  she  could  not  mount.  He  then  took  her  by  the 
waist  and  lifted  her  by  main  force,  almost  at  arm's  length,  up  to 
the  saddle,  helped  her  pull  off  one  of  her  boots,  which  was  hurting 
her,  jumped  on  his  own  horse  and  rode  away.  We  returned  to 
the  city  without  difficulty  and  although  she  had  received  a  good 
many  bruises  and  a  slight  cut  in  the  back  of  her  head,  she  enter 
tained  guests  at  dinner  the  same  evening. 

With  that  extraordinary  accuracy  which  characterises  modern 
journalism,  there  appeared  in  a  Washington  paper  next  morning 
the  following  account  of  the  incident,  entitled:  "President  to  the 
Rescue.  Goes  to  Aid  of  a  Lady  Thrown  While  Riding": 

President  Roosevelt  was  riding  in  Rock  Creek  Park  late  yesterday 
afternoon  when  he  witnessed  an  accident  to  a  lady  and  gallantly  went 
to  her  assistance.  She  had  been  thrown  from  her  horse  and  lay  for 
a  moment  unconscious  in  the  roadway  until  the  President  dashed  up 
and  dismounted  and  went  to  her  aid. 

The  President  was  accompanied  only  by  his  orderly.  He  was  just 
rounding  a  turn  in  the  Rock  Creek  drive  when  the  lady  coming  from 
the  opposite  direction  was  thrown.  Her  horse,  stepping  into  a  slight 
hole,  stumbled,  and  despite  her  riding  skill  she  was  unseated  and 
thrown  heavily  over  the  animal's  head.  The  President  leaped  from  his 
mount  without  even  reining  in,  and  was  at  her  side  before  either  his 
orderly  or  her  escort  could  turn  and  reach  the  spot.  President  Roose 
velt  assisted  her  to  her  feet  while  his  orderly  went  in  pursuit  of  her 
horse. 

We  were  lunching  together  one  day,  five  of  us,  at  the  White 
House.  Two  of  the  party,  we  were  told,  were  going  to  take  a 
walk  with  the  President  that  afternoon.  He  asked  the  rest  of 
us  the  question:  "Are  you  fond  of  walking?  Wouldn't  you  like 


RIDES  AND  WALKS  WITH  THE  PRESIDENT      117 

to  join  us?"  We  answered  that  we  should  be  glad  to  go.  Two 
carriages  were  ordered  to  take  us  to  the  starting-place.  The  first 
vague  indication  that  there  was  trouble  ahead  came  when  the 
President  stood  by  the  door  as  we  passed  out  of  the  dining-room, 
observed  our  apparel,  and  directed  one  of  us,  who  was  very  well 
dressed,  to  go  home  and  change  his  clothes.  The  carriages  came, 
and  we  drove  to  the  Chain  Bridge,  three  miles  above  George 
town,  on  the  Potomac.  There  we  crossed  over  to  the  Virginia 
side.  Two  of  the  party  had  brought  canes.  The  President  no 
ticed  it.  "You  had  better  leave  your  canes  in  the  carriage," 
he  said,  "you  may  not  be  able  to  keep  them  with  you."  This 
sounded  ominous. 

About  a  quarter  of  a  mile  below  us,  at  the  side  of  the  river, 
there  was  a  big  stone  quarry,  and  just  as  we  were  starting  from 
the  bridge  there  was  a  furious  explosion,  and  rocks  were  seen 
flying  like  hailstones,  some  of  them  clear  across  the  river,  others 
splashing  into  the  stream.  The  President's  face  was  lit  with  glee. 
"Aha!"  he  exclaimed.  "We  are  going  right  there."  Somehow 
his  joy  was  not  contagious.  Nobody  answered.  Soon  we  reached 
the  quarry.  Just  beyond  it  there  was  what  seemed  to  be  an 
impassable  barrier  of  rock  overhanging  the  river,  but  before  we 
came  to  this  the  President  pointed  out  a  place  at  the  side,  nearly 
perpendicular,  about  three  or  four  hundred  feet  high,  where  it 
was  possible,  by  scrambling  over  stones  and  bushes,  to  get  up  to 
the  woods  at  the  top  of  the  bluff.  He  said,  "If  you  can't  pass 
the  rocks,  you  can  go  up  there,"  as  if  that  were  a  great  relief! 
When  we  came  to  the  point  of  rocks  it  was  evident  enough  why 
the  canes  had  to  be  left  behind.  The  President  started  ahead, 
followed  by  his  son  Theodore;  he  scrambled  up  a  steep,  smooth 
rock  to  a  shoulder  about  fifty  feet  above  the  river,  and  then  along 
a  crack  in  a  perpendicular  cliff,  holding  on  by  another  crack  about 
seven  or  eight  feet  above  the  first  one,  and  at  last  getting  down — 
I  don't  know  how.  I  quickly  saw  the  thing  was  impossible  for 
me.  I  had  been  up  Popocatepetl  and  Toluca  and  other  Mexican 
volcanoes,  and  had  done  a  good  deal  of  scrambling  among  the 
Alps,  but  this  was  too  much.  A  negro  close  by  pointed  out  a 
boat,  and  after  much  yelling  the  boat  came  and  two  of  us  igno- 
miniously  took  passage  and  were  rowed  around,  while  young 


n8  LIFE  IN  WASHINGTON 

Roosevelt  and  two  others  succeeded  in  following  the  President. 
Then  it  was  a  furious  tramp,  up  and  down,  round  another  ledge 
not  quite  so  impossible,  where  we  crawled  on  our  hands  and  stom 
achs,  on  and  on,  until  all  of  us,  except  one  thin  Scotchman,  were 
as  red  as  boiled  lobsters  and  as  wet  as  if  we  had  been  in  a 
Russian  bath.  After  a  while  I  gave  out  and  had  to  stop  and 
rest,  and  one  of  the  party  thanked  me  as  we  came  home  in  the 
cars  from  Georgetown,  because  he  said  he  could  not  have  stood 
it  five  minutes  longer.  I  believed  that  was  true,  for  his  face 
looked  like  raw  beef.  The  man  who  had  changed  his  clothes 
didn't  change  them  quite  enough,  for  he  still  had  on  a  pair  of 
new  trousers,  which  were  now  covered  with  a  fine  plaster  of  mud 
nearly  to  the  knees. 

All  this  time  the  President  was  enjoying  himself  like  a  school 
boy.  He  climbed  another  steep  place,  almost  inaccessible,  after 
wild  flowers  for  Mrs.  Roosevelt.  The  birds,  the  flowers,  the  still, 
shady  places  in  the  woods,  the  cascades  that  tumbled  down  the 
bluff,  gave  him  the  keenest  delight.  The  rest  of  us  would  have 
enjoyed  these  things  too  if  we  had  not  been  fagged  out.  One  of 
us  said  to  him,  remembering  the  words  of  Dooley,  uDo  ye  call 
this  a  waalk,  Mr.  Prisident?  Sure  I  thought  it  was  capital  pun 
ishment."  After  it  was  over  and  we  had  crossed  the  river  to 
Georgetown,  he  told  us  to  take  the  street-car  back  to  Washington 
while  he  walked  home  with  his  son. 

When  I  reached  the  door  of  my  little  house  on  New  Hamp 
shire  Avenue,  the  servants  were  filled  with  consternation  at  my 
appearance.  The  cook  showed  the  keenest  sympathy ;  Miller,  the 
coachman,  charitably  offered  to  rub  me  down.  I  declined  the 
proffered  assistance,  however,  and  after  a  bath  thought  I  would 
take  a  short  nap  before  dinner.  I  did  so  and  awoke  next  morning 
at  half-past  five! 

The  President  had  been  a  Matterhorn  climber  and  a  member 
of  the  Alpine  Club,  but  it  requires  genius  to  find  Matterhorn 
climbing  within  five  miles  of  Washington. 

I  was  once  riding  with  him  when  he  gave  a  humorous  account 
of  the  Battle  of  Las  Guasimas,  his  first  engagement  in  Cuba.  He 
said:  "My  regiment  was  marching  through  thick  woods.  We 
could  see  nothing  and  did  not  know  who  were  on  the  right  or  on 


RIDES  AND  WALKS  WITH  THE  PRESIDENT      119 

the  left.  We  heard  firing  and  marched  that  way.  At  last  we  saw 
a  house  and  we  fired  at  that,  mainly  because  it  was  not  a  tree. 
We  learned  afterwards  that  we  had  killed  quite  a  number  of 
Spaniards.  Finally  some  of  the  officers  came  together  and  one 
of  them  congratulated  me  upon  the  victory.  I  didn't  know 
there  had  been  a  victory,  and  I  was  very  glad  to  hear  it." 

Once  I  met  the  President  riding  on  one  of  the  country  roads 
with  Mrs.  Roosevelt  and  Secretary  Root.  Some  distance  behind 
was  an  orderly,  and  still  further  back  was  an  ill-dressed  fat  man 
on  a  bicycle,  puffing  and  blowing  at  a  great  rate  to  keep  up.  I 
did  not  feel  quite  sure  whether  the  fat  man  belonged  to  the 
Secret  Service  or  to  the  anarchists  or  was  attending  very  hard 
to  some  business  of  his  own,  but  about  half  an  hour  afterwards 
in  Rock  Creek  Park  I  met  the  President  returning,  followed  by 
the  same  orderly,  and  some  distance  behind  was  the  fat  man  on 
the  bicycle.  Then  the  riders  went  up  a  long  hill  at  a  good  pace. 
The  fat  man  had  fearful  work  keeping  up  and  looked  ,as  if  he 
would  have  apoplexy.  At  the  top  of  the  hill  the  streets  forked; 
the  President  and  his  party  took  one  way,  followed  by  the  or 
derly,  and  the  fat  man  on  the  bicycle  took  the  other.  "Well,"  I 
thought,  "perhaps  I  am  mistaken  about  the  Secret  Service,  or  per 
haps  the  man  thinks  his  duty  is  finished."  I  followed  the  Presi 
dent  at  some  distance  when  suddenly,  tearing  in  from  a  side  street 
at  a  furious  rate,  came  the  fat  man  on  the  bicycle.  He  had  taken 
all  that  extra  trouble  to  keep  up  the  mystery  and  to  show  that 
he  was  not  following  the  President.  I  told  the  President  about 
this  afterwards.  He  showed  considerable  interest  and  some  annoy 
ance  and  said  he  had  not  the  slightest  idea  that  any  one  was  fol 
lowing  him,  adding:  "I'll  stop  this  right  away."  I  saw  at  once 
I  had  made  a  mistake  in  telling  him  anything  about  it. 

A  few  days  afterwards  Mr.  Cortelyou,  his  secretary,  said  to  me, 
"I  am  having  an  awful  time  with  the  President  about  these  Secret 
Service  men.  I  order  them  on,  and  he  orders  them  off,  and  I 
order  them  on  again,  and  then  there  is  trouble.  I  will  obey  him 
in  anything  but  this." 


120  LIFE  IN  WASHINGTON 

OTHER   PERSONAL    INCIDENTS 

The  President  was  always  full  of  the  exhilaration  of  unbounded 
vitality.  One  day  he  said,  "Foulke,  this  is  pretty  hard  work 
being  President,  but  I  am  having  a  good  time  of  it."  The  attacks 
upon  him  sometimes  aroused  his  ire,  but  did  not  in  the  least 
disturb  his  cheerfulness. 

One  day  he  said  to  me,  "I  am  having  a  great  deal  of  trouble 
with  the  agnostics."  Procter,  who  was  present,  said,  "What 
trouble  are  they  giving  you?"  And  he  replied,  "Oh,  they 
are  not  giving  me  any  trouble,  it  is  the  other  fellows.  I 
receive  violent  protests  from  clergymen,  asking  whether  I  intend 
Ho  insult  this  Christian  community'  by  the  appointment  of  people 
having  such  views.  Down  at  El  Paso,  for  instance,  I  appointed 
a  man  who  had  killed  three  men.  Nobody  objected  to  him  on  that 
ground,  but  when  they  found  that  he  didn't  believe  what  he  ought 
to,  then  I  had  trouble.  In  El  Paso  the  people  are  homicidal  but 
orthodox." 

I  had  been  present  when  the  particular  man  referred  to  was 
appointed,  and  I  well  remember  the  incident.  "How  many  men 
have  you  killed?"  asked  the  President. 

"Three,"  said  the  applicant. 

"How  did  you  come  to  do  it?"  said  the  President. 

"In  the  discharge  of  my  duty  as  a  public  officer." 

The  President  seemed  pleased.  "Have  you  ever  played  poker?" 
asked  the  President. 

"Yes,"  said  the  man. 

"Are  you  going  to  do  it  when  you  are  in  office?"  said  the  Presi 
dent. 

"No,"  said  the  man. 

"All  right,  I  am  going  to  appoint  you,  but  see  to  it  that  you 
observe  the  Civil  Service  law.  I  had  to  dismiss  your  predecessor 
because  he  violated  it,  and  I'll  do  the  same  to  you  if  you  don't 
keep  it.  Here  is  one  of  the  Civil  Service  Commissioners;  go  down 
and  see  him  and  he  will  tell  you  what  you  ought  to  do." 

The  man  departed,  filled  with  joy,  and  came  to  the  Commission 
an  hour  afterwards  to  receive  instructions. 

It  is  hard  for  one  who  has  not  had  pretty  close  relations  with 


.OTHER  PERSONAL  INCIDENTS  121 

the  White  House  to  understand  the  constant  stream,  not  only  of 
solicitations  for  personal  favour,  but  of  testimonials  of  regard, 
presents  of  various  kinds,  canes,  specimens,  articles  of  personal 
adornment  and  household  use,  appropriate  and  inappropriate,  usu 
ally  the  latter,  which  pour  in  upon  the  Chief  Executive.  He  must 
always  be  gracious,  however  ill-timed  the  gift.  Authors  send  their 
books  and  politicians  their  speeches. 

One  such  politician  entrusted  to  my  hands  an  autographed  copy 
of  an  address  which  he  asked  me  to  deliver  personally  to  the 
President.  Mr.  Roosevelt  was  at  that  time  an  exile  from  the 
White  House,  which  was  undergoing  repairs,  and  lived  in  a  pri 
vate  dwelling  on  the  west  side  of  La  Fayette  Square  in  rather 
crowded  quarters.  We  had  just  been  dining  together,  there  was 
only  one  other  guest,  and  as  we  were  withdrawing  through  the 
hall  I  presented  the  precious  token.  He  received  it  and  said,  "I'll 
get  Loeb  to  acknowledge  it  to-morrow,"  and  then,  setting  his  teeth 
together  grimly  and  firmly,  he  added,  "I'll  make  him  read  it  too." 

One  day  at  lunch  a  number  of  us  were  talking  of  a  certain 
public  man,  and  some  one  remarked  that  to  him  this  man  was 
extremely  antipathetic.  Upon  which  the  President  said,  "That 
reminds  me  of  King  Bomba  of  Naples.  The  king  was  riding 
across  the  Campagna  with  one  of  his  courtiers,  when  suddenly 
a  Roman  bull  made  his  appearance.  The  king  leaped  from  his 
horse  and  with  great  speed  climbed  a  tree.  His  companion  kept 
his  place  in  the  saddle,  and  the  animal  approached,  but  paid  no 
attention  to  the  horses  or  the  remaining  rider  and  passed  on. 
After  he  had  gone  a  safe  distance  the  king  descended  and  re 
mounted,  with  the  remark,  'Quest'  animale  mi  &  molto  antipatico. 
Se  fosse  leone/' "  (This  animal  is  very  antipathetic  to  me.  If  it 
had  been  a  lion!) 

No  one  whom  Mr.  Roosevelt  knew  to  be  a  steadfast  friend 
had  cause  to  shrink  from  telling  him  disagreeable  things.  I  used 
to  tell  him  many  things  of  this  sort,  and  he  always  took  it  in  good 
part,  as  he  did  when  I  occasionally  criticised  what  I  thought  were 
his  mistakes.  I  once  told  him  he  had  put  too  many  men  in  the 
Ananias  Club,  that  "the  little  ugly  word"  ought  to  be  reserved 
for  supreme  occasions  and  that  it  lost  much  of  its  force  when 
applied  too  often.  He  answered,  "I  believe  that's  true.  I'll  have 


122  LIFE  IN  WASHINGTON 

to  keep  the  membership  down."  But  he  did  not  do  it.  When 
some  one  told  a  "  whopper,"  and  he  knew  it,  he  couldn't  help 
putting  that  man  in. 

Another  time  I  had  better  luck  with  my  advice,  though  in  this 
case  the  criticism  did  not  concern  himself.  One  of  his  Cabinet 
officers  had  been  making  a  speech  which  seemed  to  me  foolish 
and  likely  to  lead  to  embarrassment  if  repeated  and  kept  before 
the  public.  When  I  called  the  President's  attention  to  this,  he 
replied,  "You're  quite  right.  I'll  write  to  him  at  once,"  and 

immediately  he  dictated  to  his  stenographer,  "My  dear :  I 

have  just  read  your  speech  at  —  — .  It  was  a  mistake,  and  I 
hope  in  your  next  speech  you  will  correct  it." 

"But,"  I  interposed,  "won't  that  give  prominence  to  it? 
Wouldn't  it  be  better  to  ask  him  not  to  repeat  it?" 

"You're  right  again,"  he  said,  and  then,  to  the  stenographer, 
"Strike  out  the  last  sentence,  and  say  'I  hope  you'll  not  refer  to 
that  subject  hereafter',"  and  thus  the  letter  went.  Mr.  Roose 
velt  was  willing  to  change  his  course  in  an  instant  if  a  suggestion 
was  made  to  him  which  appealed  to  his  own  judgment.  But  it 
must  be  his  judgment  and  not  that  of  his  adviser  which  decided. 

And  his  judgment  rarely  erred,  unless  it  were  in  cases  where 
his  means  of  knowledge  could  not  be  as  complete  as  that  of  others. 
If  there  were  any  classes  of  appointments  in  which  he  fell  a  little 
short  of  his  very  high  average  I  should  say  they  were  those  in 
which  a  thorough  knowledge  of  some  technical  profession  like 
that  of  the  law,  was  necessary  for  the  best  selection.  I  remem 
ber  once  the  question  of  appointing  a  judge  was  before  him, 
and  the  choice  lay  between  two  men.  He  inclined  to  favour  one 
of  these,  whereupon  the  three  lawyer  members  of  his  Cabinet, 
Secretaries  Root  and  Taft  and  Attorney- General  Knox,  sent  him 
a  "round  robin"  (after  his  own  example  in  Cuba)  remonstrating 
against  this  and  urging  the  other  man.  I  told  him  I  thought  the 
opinion  of  three  such  lawyers  was  likely  to  be  more  correct  than 
his  own  as  to  the  qualifications  of  an  applicant  for  a  judicial 
position. 

Near  the  end  of  his  second  term,  Congressmen,  feeling  them 
selves  safe  because  his  power  was  nearing  its  close,  began  to  be 
more  bold  and  bitter  in  their  attacks.  In  answer  to  a  message 


OTHER  PERSONAL  INCIDENTS  123 

which  had  criticised  certain  acts  of  Congress,  a  resolution  was 
introduced  denouncing  him  for  accusing  the  representatives  of 
the  people  of  corruption.  The  day  this  occurred  I  happened 
to  be  at  the  White  House  and  observed  that  the  demand  of  Dog 
berry  to  be  written  down  an  ass,  seemed  to  me  pale  and  colourless 
by  the  side  of  the  insistence  of  Congress  that  it  was  accused  of  cor 
ruption  from  words  which  did  not  of  themselves  involve  any  such 
construction.  He  laughed  heartily,  and  it  appeared  in  the  news 
papers  next  day  that  I  had  accused  Congress  of  being  worse 
than  Dogberry,  which  greatly  shocked  some  of  the  staid  Wash 
ington  people  who  were  imbued  with  reverence  for  authority.  But 
I  never  heard  that  the  President  was  annoyed  at  it. 

The  Sunday  evenings  spent  at  the  White  House  with  the  Presi 
dent  and  Mrs.  Roosevelt  were  always  especially  enjoyable.  Proc 
ter  was  often  there  and  Gifford  Pinchot  and  sometimes  Secretary 
Hay.  This  was  almost  the  only  time  when  the  President  was 
sufficiently  alone  to  give  any  opportunity  for  private  conversation 
with  him.  Mrs.  Foulke  or  one  of  my  daughters  generally  accom 
panied  me. 

I  recall  one  Sunday  in  October,  1903,  after  I  had  ceased  to  be 
Commissioner,  when  I  spent  the  evening  there  with  my  eldest 
daughter.  There  were  no  other  guests.  The  President  was  talk 
ing  of  the  failure  of  the  Panama  Canal  Treaty  in  the  Congress  at 
Bogota.  He  said  the  refusal  to  ratify  the  treaty  was  a  mere 
effort  to  blackmail  the  French  stockholders  with  the  threat  to 
confiscate  their  interests  when  the  term  of  their  concession  should 
expire.  He  insisted  that  nobody  in  that  Congress  could  see  how 
it  was  possible  for  any  one  to  be  actuated  in  this  matter  by  other 
than  venal  motives;  that  the  men  who  opposed  the  treaty  be 
lieved  that  all  its  supporters  must  have  been  bought,  so  that 
finally  these  supporters  had  to  come  around  to  the  other  side  on 
account  of  the  suspicion  against  them.  He  said  the  action  of 
such  a  body  as  this  could  not  stand  in  the  way  of  a  great  inter 
national  necessity  like  the  Panama  Canal;  that  he  should  state 
in  a  message  he  was  preparing  that  he  would  construe  "reasonable 
time,"  on  a  question  of  this  importance  agitated  for  hundreds  of 
years,  as  the  time  which  was  necessary  for  deciding  fully  which 
was  the  better  route:  that  of  Nicaragua  or  that  of  Panama;  and 


124  LIFE  IN  WASHINGTON 

if  that  proved  to  be  the  Panama  route,  he  would  say  in  decorous 
language  that  the  Columbian  Congress  should  not  so  stand  in  the 
way.  Then  if  the  French  Company  had  any  gumption  at  all 
(which  he  doubted)  there  would  soon  be  an  insurrection  in  Pan 
ama.  He  was,  he  said,  like  the  doctor  who  burned  every  wound 
or  sore  given  him  to  heal,  because  he  was  "hell  on  burns."  So  he 
(the  President)  was  Hades  on  insurrections  and  could  prevent 
anybody  from  interfering. 

1  laughingly  told  him  that  for  Machiavellian  diplomacy  he  was 
as  bad  as  a  Russian;  that  people  would  be  calling  Panama  our 
Bulgaria.    He  said  "No,"  that  if  he  were  like  the  Russians  and 
without  any  conscience  he  would  be  stirring  up  an  insurrection 
himself,  but  that  he  had  not  done  so  and  would  not  do  so.     I 
asked  him  if  he  didn't  feel  that  he  was  becoming  the  advocate  of 
secession.    He  smiled  and  said  "No,  only  of  the  right  of  resistance 
to  grinding  oppression/'  and  he  added  that  he  was  the  friend  of 
liberty.2 

2  This  was  not  mere  pleasantry,  for  Panama,  once  independent,  had 
been  most  unfortunately  annexed  to  Colombia,  from  which  its  interests 
were  utterly  distinct.     "The  Isthmus  was  looked  upon  as  a  financial 
cow  to  be  milked  for  the  benefit  of  the  country  at  large."    The  revenues 
of  the  Panama  Railroad  had  gone  mostly  into  the  pockets  of  the  states 
men  of  Bogota,  who  now  saw  in  the  canal  project  a  prospect  of  great 
additional  profit. 

Colombia  was  at  this  time  under  a  dictatorship.  In  1898  San 
Clamente  was  elected  president  and  Marroquin  vice-president.  On 
July  2ist,  1900,  Marroquin  executed  a  coup  d'etat  by  seizing  San 
Clamente  and  imprisoning  him  a  few  miles  out  of  Bogota.  Mar 
roquin  thereupon  declared  himself  possessed  of  executive  power, 
because  of  the  "absence  of  the  President,"  and  issuing  a  decree 
that  "public  order  was  disturbed,"  he  also  assumed  legislative  power. 
He  thus  ruled  as  a  dictator.  The  Constitution  of  1886  had  already 
taken  from  Panama  the  power  of  self-government  and  invested 
it  in  Colombia,  and  the  usurpation  of  Marroquin  took  away  from 
Colombia  the  power  of  government  and  invested  it  in  himself.  He 
directed  Mr.  Herran,  the  Colombian  charge  d'affaires,  to  negotiate  with 
Mr.  Hay  the  Hay-Herran  treaty,  giving  Colombia  ten  million  dollars 
and  an  annual  bonus  of  two  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  dollars  after 
nine  years.  But  now,  having  this  much  and  thinking  he  had  the  mat 
ter  in  his  own  hands,  he  determined  to  get  more  and  to  break  the 
treaty  he  had  just  made  by  summoning  a  Congress.  There  had  been 


OTHER  PERSONAL  INCIDENTS  125 

He  then  began  to  speak  of  Manchuria.  He  did  not  believe  the 
Russians  intended  to  evacuate  it,  but  did  not  see  what  he  could 
do  in  the  matter.  He  did  not  think  the  American  people  were 
prepared  to  use  force  to  drive  the  Russians  out.  Even  England 
would  not  join  in  this  effort,  though  Japan  would.  He  thought 
it  would  be  a  large  job,  and  that  while  we  were  about  it,  we  might 
find  a  nice  German  colony  comfortably  established  in  Brazil.  In 
reply  to  the  question  whether  it  would  be  possible  for  several  of 
the  great  powers  to  guarantee  the  independence  of  China,  he  said 
that  England  and  Japan  might  join  in  this,  but  France,  Russia 
and  even  Germany  would  all  oppose  it.  "The  German  Emperor," 
he  added,  "is  a  curious  man.  He  sent  'Specky'  (Speck  von  Stern- 
berg)  to  talk  confidentially  with  me,  and  wanted  me  to  guarantee 
the  Yangtze  Valley  from  foreign  interference.  I  said  I  should 

no  Congress  convened  for  four  years.  This  body  was  composed  of  his 
puppets,  who  determined  to  extort  more  money,  and  who  demanded 
of  the  Panama  Canal  Company  ten  millions  additional  for  allowing 
it  to  sell  its  rights  to  the  United  States.  When  the  Canal  Company 
refused,  the  Canal  Committee  of  the  Colombian  Senate  proposed,  on 
October  14,  1903,  that  the  matter  should  be  postponed  for  a  year,  be 
cause  by  that  time  the  term  would  expire  within  which  the  French 
Company  was  to  build  the  canal,  and  the  Colombian  Congress  could 
declare  forfeited  its  property  and  rights  and  secure  the  forty  millions 
our  Government  had  agreed  to  pay  to  that  company. 

Of  course  the  people  of  Panama  felt  outraged  at  such  a  disregard 
of  their  interests.  They  had  long  been  misgoverned  and  neglected.  As 
one  of  them  described  it,  'Notwithstanding  all  that  Colombia  has 
drained  us  of  in  the  way  of  revenues,  she  did  not  bridge  for  us  a 
single  river,  nor  make  a  single  roadway,  nor  erect  a  single  college, 
where  our  children  could  be  educated,  nor  do  anything  at  all  to  advance 
our  industries." 

So  great  was  their  resentment  at  Colombia  that  there  had  been  fifty- 
three  revolutions  and  other  disturbances  in  as  many  years;  four  of 
these  had  occurred  within  two  years  of  the  events  we  are  describing 
(between  October,  1899,  and  September,  1901).  Now  at  last,  at  the 
instigation  of  Bunau  Varilla,  who  had  been  connected  with  the  old 
Canal  Company,  they  organised  the  final  revolution  by  which  their 
independence  was  secured. 

Even  had  the  world-wide  necessity  of  an  inter-oceanic  canal  not 
been  at  stake,  the  President  would  have  been  justified  in  recognising 
the  independence  of  Panama,  which  was  demanded  with  practical 


126  LIFE  IN  WASHINGTON 

like  to  guarantee  all  China  from  foreign  interference,  but  he 
didn't  want  that.  The  idea  was  to  let  Russia  and  Germany  have 
a  free  hand,  and  then  keep  England  from  doing  anything." 

The  President  also  spoke  of  Count  Cassini,  the  Russian  Ambas 
sador,  as  a  representative  of  Russian  diplomatic  methods.  Cas 
sini  had  made  certain  definite  statements  to  Mr.  Hay  as  to  some 
Manchurian  matter;  a  few  days  afterwards  he  had  made  state 
ments  to  the  Associated  Press  quite  contradictory  to  what  he  told 
Hay,  and  afterwards,  in  Paris,  he  made  a  third  statement  denying 
that  he  had  made  either  of  the  other  two.  Comparing  them,  it 
necessarily  appeared  that  at  least  two  out  of  the  three  statements 
must  have  been  untrue,  but  in  point  of  fact  all  three  were  untrue ; 
yet  Cassini  did  not  seem  to  have  the  slightest  conception  that  he 
had  done  anything  improper. 


unanimity  by  all  its  people.  As  Charles  J.  Bonaparte  well  said  in  a 
letter  to  the  Springfield  Republican,  published  on  August  30,  1904: 

"I  think  he  did  right  because  I  think  that  Louis  XVI  did  right  in 
recognising  the  independence  of  the  revolted  American  colonies ;  that 
England,  France,  and  Russia  did  right  in  recognising  the  independence 
of  Greece  and  liberating  its  territory  from  Turks  and  Egyptians;  that 
England  and  France  did  right  in  recognising  the  independence  of 
Belgium  and  compelling  its  evacuation  by  the  Dutch.  I  think  he  did 
right  in  securing  for  the  people  of  Panama  a  government  of  their 
choice,  and  with  it  peace  and  good  order  and  the  hope  of  vast  improve 
ment  in  their  moral,  educational,  sanitary,  and  commercial  conditions 
in  the  near  future,  in  the  place  of  a  government  detested  by  all  classes 
of  the  population,  illegal  in  its  origin,  maintained  by  force,  corrupt, 
oppressive  and  wholly  neglectful  of  its  duties." 

If  the  President  had  not  intervened  as  he  did,  not  only  would  the 
work  on  the  Canal  have  been  indefinitely  postponed,  but  the  people  of 
the  Isthmus  would  have  been  relegated  to  a  civil  war  with  the  accom 
paniments  of  massacre,  pillage,  and  every  form  of  barbarity.  The 
other  leading  nations  of  the  world  followed  us  in  recognising  the 
independence  of  Panama;  a  subsequent  treaty  with  that  republic  was 
confirmed  by  an  overwhelming  vote  in  the  Senate,  and  the  President, 
who  accomplished  this  work  of  general  beneficence  to  the  whole  world, 
was  soon  afterwards  elected  by  our  people  by  the  greatest  majority 
ever  cast,  up  to  that  time,  for  a  Chief  Executive.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  as  to  the  ratification  of  his  act  by  the  country,  and  even  his 
critics  have  not  proposed  a  restoration  to  Colombia  of  the  Canal  Zone. 


ROOSEVELT  CHARACTERISTICS  127 

ROOSEVELT    CHARACTERISTICS 

Theodore  Roosevelt  had  the  power  of  securing  the  devotion  of 
his  followers  more  completely  than  any  other  man  of  his  time. 
I  have  felt  this  very  forcibly  in  my  own  case.  I  am  generally 
none  too  ready  to  follow  the  leadership  of  another.  The  mere 
fact  that  authority  is  claimed  arouses  a  certain  spirit  of  resist 
ance.  But  I  never  had  the  least  particle  of  that  feeling  toward 
Roosevelt.  It  seemed  so  natural  and  inevitable  that  he  should 
lead  in  the  great  things  he  was  undertaking  that  it  was  always  a 
delight  to  follow.  He  gave  >ou  so  fully  the  idea  of  co-operation 
in  his  leadership  that  the  notion  of  mere  subordination  disap 
peared.  He  was  a  king  by  diviner  right  than  that  of  any  reigning 
monarch  in  the  world — by  the  right  of  his  supreme  ability  to  com 
mand.  I  quite  concur  in  the  estimate  of  him  once  expressed  to  me 
by  Oscar  S.  Straus,  who  had  been  in  his  Cabinet:  that  in  view 
of  his  wide  attainments,  his  prodigious  activities,  and  his  power 
to  control  those  who  were  around  him,  he  was  more  nearly  a 
superman  than  any  other  character  with  whom  we  were  ac 
quainted.  But  it  was  not  merely  devotion  that  I  always 
felt  for  him;  it  was  an  abiding  affection.  I  cared  for  him  more 
than  for  any  man  outside  of  my  own  family,  and  I  do  not  doubt 
that  many  thousands  of  Americans  could  say  the  same  thing.  This 
was  not  a  question  of  mere  personal  charm,  though  he  had  that 
in  a  pre-eminent  degree;  it  depended  even  more  upon  our  reliance 
upon  the  character  that  lay  beneath  his  personality,  his  intense 
patriotism,  and  his  lofty  aims.  His  friends  were  not  hypno 
tised,  but  under  their  enthusiasms  lay  a  profound  conviction 
of  the  supreme  qualities  which  Roosevelt  undoubtedly  pos 
sessed. 

But  if  he  bound  his  friends  to  him  by  the  most  indissoluble  cords 
of  affection,  he  aroused  his  enemies  to  the  highest  pitch  of  rage 
and  hate.  I  had  a  masseur  who  told  me  that  the  heart  of  one 
of  his  patients  always  started  violently  at  the  mere  mention  of 
Roosevelt's  name. 

His  sympathy  and  friendship  for  the  common  people  must  have 
impressed  every  one  who  knew  him.  Most  men  with  strong  demo 
cratic  instincts  have  no  other  choice;  they  themselves  belong  to 


128  LIFE  IN  WASHINGTON 

the  multitude.  But  here  was  a  man  of  aristocratic  lineage  and 
antecedents,  who  was  naturally  fond  of  the  plain  people,  who 
respected  them  and  liked  them  quite  as  much  as  those  of 
his  own  class.  Indeed,  the  people  of  the  West  regarded 
him,  and  I  think  correctly,  as  more  their  own  than  did 
the  people  of  the  East.  The  policeman,  the  locomotive  en 
gineer,  the  cowboy,  the  mountain  guide,  had  often  a  closer  sym 
pathy  with  him  than  had  the  members  of  the  exclusive  social 
circle  in  which  he  was  born  and  bred,  and  this  feeling  of  fellow 
ship  had  not  the  least  taint  of  cant  or  political  motive  behind  it. 
He  was  naturally  fond  of  men,  of  good  men,  whether  they  spoke 
pure  English  or  not;  of  strong  men,  even  if  their  hands  were  hard 
and  grimy. 

Some  who  did  not  know  the  President  found  it  hard  to  realise 
from  the  fierce-looking  portraits  of  him  and  from  his  stern  denun 
ciation  of  the  unworthy  that  he  was  constantly  bubbling  over 
with  kindness  as  well  as  with  the  joy  of  living.  His  affection  for 
his  family  was  unbounded.  It  was  a  delight,  if  one  went  to  the 
White  House  a  little  before  dinner  time,  to  hear  the  racket  going 
on  above,  where  he  was  romping  with  the  children,  or  the  thump 
ing  on  the  stairs,  as  they  came  down  three  or  four  steps  at  a 
time.  At  the  table  he  was  constantly  filled  with  merriment  and 
kept  his  guests  in  roars  of  laughter.  He  had  the  keenest  pos 
sible  sense  of  humour;  of  the  thousand  absurdities  which  took 
place  in  his  presence  not  one  escaped  his  penetrating  observa 
tion.  He  could  enjoy  a  joke  upon  himself  quite  as  well  as  a  joke 
upon  any  one  else,  and  his  friends  were  not  in  the  least  afraid 
of  the  most  absolute  candour  in  talking  to  him. 

When  he  talked  about  himself  and  his  own  course,  as  he  often 
did,  it  was  in  the  most  impersonal  way,  as  if  it  were  quite  an 
other  man  whose  conduct  was  being  brought  up  for  review.  After 
his  work  was  over  he  was  fond  of  play,  but  I  never  knew  a  man 
who  took  such  joy  as  he  in  the  work  itself;  he  revelled  in  it.  He 
not  only  worked  tremendously  himself,  he  made  everybody  around 
him  work  in  the  same  way.  It  was  a  remarkable  thing  to  see  him 
going  over  his  daily  correspondence,  reading  the  letters  of  others, 
correcting  his  own,  and  holding  a  conversation  upon  some  impor 
tant  public  question  at  the  same  time,  keeping  up  two  lines  of 


ROOSEVELT  CHARACTERISTICS  129 

thought  simultaneously  and  working  rapidly  at  both  of  them. 
He  could  think  like  lightning,  and  many  of  the  sudden  decisions 
which  men  attributed  to  rash  impulsiveness  were  due  to  the  fact 
that  in  a  minute  he  had  weighed  considerations  which  for  many 
men  would  require  an  hour.  The  promptness  with  which  he 
answered  letters  was  amazing.  When  I  was  on  the  Commission, 
if  we  wrote  to  one  of  the  Departments  we  were  lucky  to  get  an 
answer  within  a  week;  if  we  wrote  to  the  President  we  heard 
from  him  within  twenty-four  hours.  He  once  told  me  that  he 
did  not  work  as  many  hours  a  day  as  Cleveland,  but  that  his  work 
was  more  intense.  He  did  not  sit  up  late  at  night  going  over  the 
details  of  documents  and  testimony.  He  left  this  to  others 
whom  he  trusted.  He  had  greater  facility  perhaps  than  any  man 
of  his  time  in  availing  himself  of  the  labour  of  skilled  subordi 
nates.  Occasionally,  however,  he  did  this  detail  work  himself. 
Once  he  promised  to  read  personally  the  hundreds  of  pages  of 
evidence  in  the  Sampson-Schley  controversy,  and  he  did  soj  though 
much  of  this  work  was  a  pure  waste  of  time. 

But  although  the  President  was  a  tremendous  worker,  he  bent 
the  bow  backward  so  strongly  in  relaxation  that  he  never  seemed 
to  become  exhausted.  He  took  this  in  every  way  possible,  in 
intense  physical  exercise,  as  we  have  already  seen,  in  conversation 
upon  outside  subjects,  and  in  reading.  He  used  to  read  some 
light  literature  after  he  went  to  bed,  and  it  often  put  him  to 
sleep. 

Once  when  he  was  hard  at  work  settling  the  coal  strike  and  was 
also  suffering  from  an  injury  received  when  motoring  in  Massa 
chusetts,  he  sent  to  Herbert  Putnam,  librarian  of  the  Congres 
sional  Library,  and  asked  for  some  book  which  could  not  be  of  the 
slightest  use  in  reference  to  anything  then  pending.  Putnam  sent 
him  "The  Life  of  John  Sobieski."  But  no  book  could  be  useless 
to  Roosevelt.  He  began  talking  about  it  in  his  usual  vigorous 
way,  drawing  a  lot  of  pertinent  political  morality  out  of  the  fail 
ures  of  the  Poles  in  working  together  in  the  important  crises  of 
their  history. 

At  another  time  he  was  greatly  absorbed  in  the  study  of  "The 
Life  of  Lincoln"  by  Nicolay  and  Hay.  John  Hay,  then  Secretary 
of  State,  is  reported  to  have  said,  "I  never  heard  of  any  one  read- 


i3o  LIFE  IN  WASHINGTON 

ing  my  life  of  Lincoln  from  beginning  to  end.  I  once  offered  five 
dollars  a  volume  to  the  members  of  my  own  family  if  they  would 
read  it  through,  but  I  couldn't  get  any  readers  that  way.  There 
is  only  one  man  I  know  of  who  did  it,  and  he  is  the  busiest  man 
in  America,  the  President  of  the  United  States." 

Mr.  Roosevelt's  mind  was  of  a  primitive  type.  All  sophistry, 
casuistry,  diplomacy,  and  unnecessary  complexities  and  refine 
ments  were  foreign  to  him.  He  could  "think  straight  and  see 
clear,"  and  he  sought  his  end  by  the  directest  road.  He  was 
absolutely  sincere  and  as  unselfish  as  any  man  could  be  who 
played  the  part  he  did  in  the  history  of  the  world.  Some  men 
used  to  speak  of  him  as  "erratic,"  "an  uncertain  quantity."  If 
by  erratic  it  was  meant  that  he  was  not  like  anybody  else,  that 
was  true;  he  was  certainly  unique,  not  only  in  his  brilliant  per 
sonality,  but  in  the  almost  childlike  open-mindedness,  which  char 
acterised  his  dealings  with  all.  But  as  to  being  an  uncertain 
quantity,  no  man  in  the  world  was  any  less  uncertain  than  he. 
His  conduct  in  any  given  case,  */  you  knew  all  the  facts,  could 
be  foretold  more  surely  than  that  of  any  other  man  I  ever  knew. 
When  you  could  say  what  was  the  right  thing  to  do,  so  far  as  the 
right  was  humanly  practicable,  you  had  the  answer  to  the  prob 
lem.  He  had  to  make  this  great  government  of  ours  work,  and 
he  made  it  work  as  well  as  it  would  work  at  all. 

His  sense  of  justice  was  instinctive  and  unerring.  I  think  his 
devotion  to  the  Civil  Service  system  was  principally  due  to  the 
fact  that  the  system  encouraged  fair  play,  that  under  it  the  farm 
er's  lad  and  the  mechanic's  son,  who  had  no  one  to  speak  for 
them,  had  the  same  opportunity  in  competing  for  the  public 
service  as  the  social  or  political  favourite.  This  love  of  fair  play 
was  the  thing  that  made  him  urge  Southern  Democrats  to  come 
up  for  the  examinations,  which  thus  brought  them  into  the  classi 
fied  service.  It  was  this  that  also  gave  "to  the  honest  and  capable 
coloured  man  an  even  chance  with  the  honest  and  capable  white 
man";  and  that  led  him  to  say  of  the  negro  question:  "We 
are  in  a  back  eddy.  I  don't  know  how  we  are  going  to  get  out, 
or  when.  The  one  way  I  know  that  does  not  lead  out  is  for  us 
to  revert  to  a  condition  of  semi-slavery.  That  leads  us  further 
in,  became  it  does  not  stop  there!'  It  was  this  notion  of  fair 


ROOSEVELT  CHARACTERISTICS  131 

play,  as  well  as  his  sympathy  for  the  poor  who  would  perish  in 
the  great  cities  of  the  East  from  the  consequences  of  the  coal 
strike  that  led  him  to  interfere;  and  I  can  quite  believe  the  story 
told  by  Jacob  Riis,  that,  after  listening  to  the  accounts  of  the 
suffering  which  would  be  entailed,  as  well  as  to  the  warnings  of 
politicians  who  told  him  that  his  interference  would  ruin  his 
career,  he  set  his  face  grimly  and  said,  "Yes,  I  will  do  it.  I 
suppose  that  ends  me,  but  it  is  right,  and  I  will  do  it." 

It  was  also  that  sentiment  of  fair  play  which  afterwards  led 
him  to  take  ground  against  the  exorbitant  demands  of  the  labour 
unions  when  he  refused  to  permit  the  discharge  of  Miller,  the 
assistant  foreman  of  the  bookbindery,  because  Miller  did  not 
belong  to  any  union.  He  was  absolutely  consistent  in  both  posi 
tions.  This,  too,  explains  his  declaration  to  the  representatives  of 
the  labouring  men  who  came  to  dine  with  him:  "Yes,  the  White 
House  door,  while  I  am  here,  shall  swing  open  as  easily  for  the 
labouring  man  as  for  the  capitalist,  and  no  easier" 

It  was  natural  that  his  simple  way  of  dealing  with  men  and 
things  should  be  quite  misunderstood  by  politicians,  and  that 
some  of  his  Tammany  adversaries  in  New  York  should  call  it 
the  "honesty  racket"  and  exclaim,  "How  well  he  does  it!"  It 
was  not  half  so  hard  to  do  as  they  imagined.  And  yet  in  his 
treatment  of  political  bosses  like  Platt  and  Quay,  he  never  refused 
to  confer  freely  with  the  men  whom  the  people  had  chosen  as 
their  representatives,  or  to  maintain  friendly  relations  with  them; 
it  was  only  when  they  sought  something  which  he  thought  ought 
not  to  be  done  that  he  stood  in  their  way. 

When  Roosevelt  returned  from  his  African  trip  a  remarkable 
ovation  was  given  him  on  his  arrival  in  New  York,  and  he  was 
undoubtedly  the  most  popular  man  in  America,  and  probably  in 
the  world.  But  when  he  again  undertook  the  work  of  reform  in 
favour  of  open  primaries  and  other  needed  changes  to  prevent 
the  unwholesome  manipulation  of  political  parties,  he  began  to 
arouse  enmities  on  all  sides,  and  it  was  only  a  few  months  before 
every  one  seemed  to  be  carping  at  all  that  he  did. 

Gossip  was  particularly  venomous  in  Washington  in  the  winter 
of  1910  and  1911,  and  from  this  place  I  addressed  him  the  fol 
lowing  letter: 


132  LIFE  IN  WASHINGTON 

Dec.  23d,  1910. 
MY  DEAR  COL.  ROOSEVELT: 

Mrs.  Foulke  and  I  have  been  spending  some  three  weeks  here  in 
Washington.  Nearly  everybody  seems  to  be  snarling  and  snapping 
at  your  heels,  including  some  of  your  former  appointees  and  those 
who  have  been  pretty  close  to  you.  There  are  gossips  galore.  "I 
have  always  been  very  fond  of  him  but" — and  here  follows  an  assort 
ment  of  cock-and-bull  stories  that  "doth  allay  the  good  precedence" 
and  would  adorn  a  daily  record  of  Bedlam.  Last  night  at  a  dinner 
I  had  a  running  fight  for  two  hours  with  half  a  dozen  of  them,  and 
so  it  goes  from  day  to  day.  I  must  say  the  sudden  revulsion  of  feel 
ing  with  Dewey  and  with  yourself  gives  me  a  worse  opinion  of 
American  constancy  than  I  like  to  have.  But  one  can't  argue  with 
absolute  unreason,  and  the  thing  is  to  wait  till  the  tide  starts  the 
other  way  and  catch  it  then. 

In  contrast,  however,  to  this  unmusical  chorus  is  the  word  of  the 
Japanese  ambassador,  Baron  Uchida,  whose  wife  was  a  classmate  of 
my  daughter  and  is  Mrs.  Foulke's  intimate  friend.  He  mentioned  his 
pleasure  at  meeting  you  when  you  came  to  the  Geographical  Society 
and  spoke  words  of  earnest,  and,  I  think,  sincere,  appreciation  of  your 
friendship  for  Japan. 

To  this  he  answered: 

January  2,  1911. 

I  was  amused  and  interested  in  your  account  of  the  snarling  at  me 
in  Washington.  As  a  matter  of  fact  I  think  it  is  fairly  universal.  I 
was  quite  prepared  for  it.  After  the  reception  on  my  return  last 
June  I  told  my  sister,  Mrs.  Robinson,  that  though  I  appreciated  en 
tirely  the  purpose  of  those  who  arranged  the  reception,  I  could  not 
help  feeling  a  little  uncomfortable  over  it  because  the  greeting  was 
slightly  hysterical,  and  there  always  comes  a  revulsion  after  hysteria. 
To  use  another  simile  I  then  used,  I  was  like  Peary  at  the  North  Pole, 
and  any  way  I  walked  I  could  not  help  walking  South. 

You  say  it  has  altered  your  opinion  of  the  American  people.  It  has 
not  altered  mine  the  least  little  bit.  I  always  knew  that  such  a  revulsion 
was  bound  to  come,  and  the  fact  of  its  coming  does  not  change  the 
great  debt  of  obligation  I  am  under  to  the  people.  After  all,  no 
matter  what  they  say  now,  they  for  twelve  years  gave  me  a  position 
of  power  and  influence  such  as  only  four  or  five  other  men  in  the 
history  of  the  country  have  had.  The  present  feeling  may  wear  itself 
out,  or  it  may  not.  If  it  does,  and  I  regain  any  influence  and  can  use 
it  to  good  purpose,  I  shall  be  glad;  and  if  it  does  not,  I  shall  be 
exceedingly  happy  here  in  my  own  home,  doing  my  own  work,  without 
a  regret  of  any  kind,  and  really  on  the  whole  having  as  thoroughly 


ROOSEVELT  CHARACTERISTICS  133 

enjoyable  a  time  as  ever  before  in  my  life.  But  I  wish  I  could  see  you 
and  talk  it  all  over.  Could  you  and  Mrs.  Foulke  come  on  to  New  York 
and  spend  a  night  with  us  here? 

Faithfully  yours, 

THEODORE  ROOSEVELT. 

A  little  later  Mr.  Roosevelt  invited  Mr.  Lucius  B.  Swift  and 
myself  to  visit  him  at  Oyster  Bay,  where  he  gave  us  graphic 
reminiscences  of  various  notables  and  crowned  heads  in  Europe. 
I  remember  well  his  estimate  of  Emperor  William:  "A  very  force 
ful  man,  but  superficial."  It  is  much  the  same  estimate  that  John 
Morley  gives  in  his  reminiscences  on  the  occasion  of  the  Kaiser's 
visit  to  England.  The  Emperor's  attainments  came  from  his 
extensive  intercourse  with  others  and  not  at  all  from  study.  When 
I  was  in  Berlin  in  1890  I  became  acquainted  with  Bogdan  Krieger, 
the  librarian  of  the  Kaiser's  private  library  in  the  imperial  palace 
at  Berlin.  He  told  me  that  during  all  the  years  he  had  been 
there  he  had  never  once  seen  the  Emperor  in  his  own  library. 

Mr.  Roosevelt  had  the  highest  opinion  of  the  general  literary 
and  scientific  attainments  of  the  King  of  Italy,  whom  he  con 
sidered  the  most  cultivated  monarch  he  had  met. 

I  have  on  several  occasions  received  from  Mr.  Roosevelt  friendly 
criticisms  of  various  books  I  have  written.  Among  these  are  the 
following: 

January  4,  1907. 
DEAR  FOULKE: 

...  I  took  down  with  me  to  Pine  Knot,  for  my  four  days'  Christ 
mas  week  holiday,  your  "Life  of  Morton,"  and  I  have  been  so  much 
interested  in  it  and  so  much  impressed  by  it  that  I  feel  that  I  must 
tell  you  so.  What  a  rugged  giant  of  a  man  he  was!  It  seems  to  me 
that,  of  course  always  excepting  Lincoln,  he  stands  in  the  very  front 
of  the  civilians  who  did  most  service  during  the  Civil  War.  No  cabinet 
minister  and  no  other  war  governor  had  a  task  quite  as  hard  as  his, 
and  at  least  no  other  war  governor  had  a  task  as  important.  I  am 
ashamed  to  say  that  until  I  read  your  book  I  had  not  the  full  idea  I 
should  have  had  of  the  man's  greatness  or  of  the  incalculable  service 
he  rendered  the  country.  I  suppose  that  this  was  because  while  at 
Harvard,  and  for  a  year  or  two  afterwards,  I  moved  in  what  might 
be  called  Mugwump  circles,  where  the  Nation  and  the  Evening  Post 
were  treated  as  well-nigh  final  authorities,  until  I  got  out  into  the  world 
of  men  and  myself  took  part  in  the  rough  and  tumble  of  the  life  where 


134  LIFE  IN  WASHINGTON 

great  deeds  are  actually  done.  I  very  much  wish  that  Rhodes  in 
his  last  two  volumes  had  not  written  in  the  Mugwump  strain.  I 
greatly  admired  his  first  five  volumes,  but  I  think  his  last  two  show 
a  lamentable  falling  off.  They  give  the  real  Mugwump  view  and  betray 
the  Mugwump  utter  lack  of  perspective.  One  may  condemn  unstintedly 
much  that  was  done  by  Gram  and  the  stalwart  Republicans  without 
becoming  so  blind  as  to  fail  to  see  that  it  was  the  Southerners  them 
selves  who  really  forced  the  Fifteenth  Amendment  and  reconstruction 
on  the  North,  for  instance ;  and  above  all  without  becoming  so  blind 
as  to  fail  to  see  that  the  Copperheads,  ranging  from  Vallandigham  up 
to  Hendricks  and  Seymour,  acted  so  badly  during  the  Civil  War  that 
it  is  the  veriest  folly  and  iniquity  to  treat  any  subsequent  action 
of  theirs  as  putting  them  in  the  same  category  with  a  man  like  Morton, 
in  spite  of  Morton's  shortcomings  after  the  war. 

So  it  is  with  Schurz.  Rhodes  actually  calls  him  an  ideal  Senator, 
which  is  in  itself  an  absurdity;  but  the  praise  of  him  becomes  even 
more  absurd  when  compared  with  what  he  says  and  leaves  unsaid 
of  Morton,  for  the  service  Morton  rendered  during  the  iron  times  of 
the  Civil  War  makes  Schurz's  whole  career  seem  pinchbeck  by  contrast. 
But  Schurz,  like  Sumner,  came  from  among  the  classes  that  write ; 
and  the  people  who  feel  superior  to  others,  and  who  also  have  the 
literary  habit,  are  apt  to  persuade  themselves  and  others  that  there 
really  is  such  superiority;  whereas  in  reality  these  men  are  really  the 
heroes  only  of  the  cloister  and  the  parlour,  and  dwindle  to  littleness 
in  the  great  crises,  where  men  like  Morton  tower  above  their  fellows. 

Also  the  following  on  March  29,  1907: 

MY  DEAR  FOULKE:  The  translation  of  "Paul  the  Deacon"  has  just 
come,  and  I  have  already  begun  to  read  it.  It  is  such  a  pleasure  to 
have  friends  who  do  such  things  as  you  do!  What  a  delightful  old 
boy  the  Deacon  was ;  and  what  an  interesting  mixture  of  fact  and  fable 
he  wrote ! 

And  later,  on  July  30,  1916: 

Both  Mrs.  Roosevelt  and  I  loved  your  poems — perhaps  most  of  all 
those  that  referred  to  your  dear  wife,  to  whom  give  our  warmest  re 
membrances.  I  am  very  proud  of  the  poem  about  me  and  am  glad  that 
it  faces  the  one  about  Oliver  Morton. 

OTHER  WASHINGTON   ASSOCIATIONS 

While  in  Washington  I  was  a  member  of  a  number  of  clubs 
and  societies:  the  Cosmos,  University,  and  Chevy  Chase  clubs, 


OTHER  WASHINGTON  ASSOCIATIONS  135 

the  Geographical  Society,  Archaeological  Institute,  etc.  But  there 
was  one  of  these  with  which  my  connection  was  quite  intimate, 
the  Washington  Literary  Society.  It  was  composed  largely  of  the 
older  residents  of  Washington,  with  a  smaller  admixture  of  the 
official  and  transient  population  of  the  city.  Alexander  Graham 
Bell,  Ainsworth  R.  Spofford,  John  W.  Foster,  Francis  E.  Leupp, 
Herbert  Putnam,  Carroll  D.  Wright,  David  J.  Hill,  and  George 
Kennan  were  among  its  members.  Kennan  read  some  excellent 
papers  to  the  club,  one  on  "Napoleonder,"  the  Russian  folk  myth 
based  on  the  invasion  by  Napoleon;  another  was  a  remarkable 
essay  on  "Suicides."  Both  of  these  afterwards  appeared  in  maga 
zine  form. 

I  came  to  know  Kennan  quite  well.  I  had  met  him  a  number 
of  years  before  at  his  Washington  home  whither  I  had  gone  to 
ask  if  he  had  discovered  any  errors  in  my  monograph  "Slav  and 
Saxon,"  that  I  might  make  the  necessary  corrections  in  my  sub 
sequent  editions.  His  working  room  at  that  time  was  draped 
like  a  Kirghiz  tent,  with  divans,  arms  and  curios,  and  was  highly 
picturesque  and  extraordinary.  I  saw  a  good  deal  of  him  after 
wards  at  Baddeck,  on  Cape  Breton  Island,  where  he  had  a  sum 
mer  home.  Kennan  was  like  the  Ancient  Mariner.  While  he  was 
speaking  one  could  not  choose  but  hear.  Indeed,  whenever  he 
talked,  either  of  his  Siberian  journeys,  of  his  visit  to  Mont  Pelee 
after  the  eruption,  or  of  his  many  other  thrilling  adventures, 
both  the  story  and  the  manner  of  its  telling  were  so  absorbing 
as  to  exclude  entirely  all  other  things. 

The  Literary  Society  used  to  meet  at  the  houses  of  the  various 
members.  My  house  was  much  too  tiny  for  this,  so  when  my  turn 
came  I  entertained  the  members  in  one  of  the  ballrooms  at  the 
New  Willard,  where  Mr.  Spofford,  the  veteran  librarian  of  Con 
gress,  gave  us  an  excellent  paper. 

Mr.  Spofford  was  a  friend  whose  companionship  I  greatly  prized. 
He  was  a  very  lovable  man  and  had  the  most  phenomenal  memory 
of  any  one  I  ever  knew.  The  Congressional  Library,  the  largest 
in  the  country,  had  a  very  insufficient  catalogue,  but  it  "didn't 
need  one";  Spofford  knew  all  that  was  in  it.  Any  Congressman 
who  wanted  information  had  only  to  see  him.  He  could  tell 
him  of  all  extant  literature  on  any  subject,  and  this  was  much 


136  LIFE  IN  WASHINGTON 

easier  than  to  fumble  for  hours  among  the  cases  of  a  card  cata 
logue.  Although  he  was  then  a  very  old  man,  he  was  fond  of 
taking  long  rides  into  the  country,  and  among  the  most  delight 
ful  hours  I  spent  when  Civil  Service  Commissioner,  were  those 
at  the  side  of  Mr.  Spofford  on  his  slow  and  easy-gaited  horse, 
wandering  not  only  among  the  fields  of  Maryland  and  Virginia, 
but  also  among  the  fields  of  literature  and  history,  of  which  his 
knowledge  was  profound  and  inexhaustible. 

Other  delightful  recollections  of  my  life  in  Washington  were 
connected  with  the  Round  Table  Club  at  the  Congressional 
Library.  This  was  extremely  informal;  indeed,  it  was  not  an 
organisation  at  all.  Mr.  Herbert  Putnam,  the  librarian,  invited 
a  certain  number  of  his  friends  to  lunch  each  day  in  the  large, 
airy,  attractive  room  on  the  top  floor  of  the  Library.  These  gen 
tlemen  had  the  right  to  bring  with  them  their  friends  as  invited 
guests.  Mr.  Putnam  generally  had  guests  of  his  own,  and  many 
distinguished  men  from  all  parts  of  the  world  were  there. 
Science,  art,  politics,  diplomacy,  literature,  were  all  represented, 
and  the  conversation,  sometimes  general  and  sometimes  among 
little  groups,  was  both  brilliant  and  instructive.  At  one  of  these 
meetings  I  was  sitting  next  to  Augustus  St.  Gaudens,  the  sculptor, 
and  had  an  interesting  talk  with  him  regarding  the  meaning  of 
his  Adams  monument  in  Rock  Creek  Cemetery.  I  have  always 
considered  this  monument  as  the  finest  specimen  of  the  sculptor's 
art  since  the  time  of  the  Greeks.  The  heavily  draped  figure  and 
solemn  face  and  the  wonderful  setting  have  made  it  im 
pressive  beyond  any  other  work  of  art  I  have  ever  known.  I 
have  seen  groups  of  visitors  chatting  and  laughing  before  they 
entered  the  monument  enclosure — it  is  surrounded  by  a  high 
hedge  or  thicket — but  when  they  came  in  and  took  their  places 
on  the  marble  benches  in  front  of  the  statue  they  were  instantly 
awed  into  silence.  There  is  something  inscrutable  about  the  face, 
and  people  have  given  all  sorts  of  meaning  to  it,  a  point  which 
the  sculptor  was  by  no  means  anxious  to  clarify.  Mr.  Procter 
told  me  he  once  asked  St.  Gaudens  what  particular  feeling  that 
inscrutable  face  was  intended  to  represent,  and  the  sculptor 
answered,  "Why,  don't  you  know?"  which  cut  short  further 
enquiries.  I  made  up  my  mind  not  to  be  caught  in  this  way 


OTHER  WASHINGTON  ASSOCIATIONS  13? 

and  yet  to  find  out  what  I  could,  so  I  observed  to  him  that  a 
great  work  of  painting  or  sculpture  which  depicted  emotion  seemed 
to  me  like  a  great  work  of  music;  the  feeling  was  there,  but  could 
not  always  be  analysed,  and  I  said  that  was  the  impression  I 
derived  from  his  statue,  and  I  supposed  that  was  what  he  intended. 
He  answered  me  that  this  was  the  case.  I  really  did  not  get  any 
more  information  than  Procter,  except  that  the  mystery  regarding 
the  meaning  of  the  statue  was  not  intended  to  be  more  clearly 
revealed.  In  quite  a  different  way  this  statue  calls  to  my  mind 
the  face  of  Monna  Lisa.  In  both  cases  the  inscrutable  adds 
greatly  to  the  power  of  the  work. 

One  of  the  duties  imposed  upon  many  of  those  who  hold  office 
in  Washington  is  that  of  responding  to  invitations  to  deliver 
addresses  at  various  places  throughout  the  country  and  upon  all 
sorts  of  occasions.  I  received  many  of  these,  most  of  which  I 
declined,  since  they  would  interfere  too  seriously  with  my  work 
upon  the  Civil  Service  Commission.  There  were  a  few  of  them 
that  I  accepted  and  among  those  that  stand  out  most  prominently 
in  my  memory  was  a  memorial  address  at  Canton,  Ohio,  which  I 
had  been  asked  to  deliver  on  the  anniversary  of  McKinley's  death, 
and  a  memorial  address  at  Gettysburg  on  Decoration  Day.  At  the 
latter  place  the  historic  surroundings,  the  great  multitude  of  chil 
dren  who  came  to  decorate  the  graves,  and  the  remembrance  that 
it  was  here  that  Lincoln  had  delivered  his  immortal  words,  gave, 
as  it  seemed  to  me,  an  impressive  character  to  the  occasion. 

I  have  already  spoken  of  the  paternal  care  taken  of  me  when  in 
Washington  by  Miller,  the  butler,  and  his  wife,  Minnie,  the  cook. 
They  were  Irish  servants  of  the  very  best  type.  Miller,  who  was 
by  turns  butler  and  coachman,  was  very  proud  of  driving  the 
President  and  Mrs.  Roosevelt,  as  he  did  on  one  or  two  occasions 
when  we  went  to  Georgetown  for  a  row  up  the  Potomac.  He  took 
excellent  care  of  the  horses  and  of  the  dog,  Grouse,  a  setter  which 
he  trained  in  a  remarkable  manner.  The  dog  would  run  out  in 
the  morning  when  he  saw  the  postman  coming,  take  the  letters 
in  his  mouth,  bring  them  up  into  my  bedroom  before  I  rose, 
and  lay  them  on  the  bed.  Sometimes  Miller  would  send  the  dog 
after  a  particular  horse,  having  left  the  stable  door  open  and 
the  halter  untied  on  purpose.  Grouse  would  run,  seize  the  strap 


I38  LIFE  IN  WASHINGTON 

of  the  halter,  and  lead  the  horse  to  the  place  appointed.  He 
used  to  do  the  marketing  for  Minnie  at  the  grocer's.  She  would 
write  down  the  order,  put  it  in  a  basket,  and  Grouse  would  go 
and  return  with  the  provisions.  This  was  indeed  the  usual  method 
of  purchase  for  a  considerable  time.  But  the  most  remarkable 
evidence  of  his  intelligence  was  on  one  occasion  when  he  came 
into  the  kitchen  and  began  pulling  at  her  dress.  She  knew  it 
meant  something  and  followed  him.  He  went  out  the  door,  around 
the  house,  and  into  a  vacant  lot  opposite,  where  he  took  her 
into  the  middle  of  the  lot  and  stopped.  She  looked  around  and 
there  upon  the  ground  was  a  purse.  This  was  the  highest  mark  of 
intelligence  I  have  ever  known  in  a  four-footed  animal.  He  could 
of  course  have  brought  the  purse  to  her  after  he  had  found  it, 
but  that  would  have  given  no  clue  to  where  it  came  from.  He 
evidently  knew  it  was  a  valuable  thing  which  had  been  lost  and 
that  she  ought  to  know  where  it  was. 

It  was  in  the  spring  of  1903  that  I  was  forced,  because  of 
ill  health,  to  give  up  my  post  as  Civil  Service  Commissioner.  I 
then  went  to  the  baths  of  Nauheim  in  Germany  for  treatment 
for  an  affection  of  the  heart,  which  has  continued  with  some  inter 
missions  ever  since.  The  following  fall  I  returned  to  Washing 
ton,  remained  there  some  months,  and  then  moved  back  to  my 
home  in  Indiana. 


THE   MUSKOGEE   INVESTIGATION 

It  was  in  the  later  days  of  President  Roosevelt's  administra 
tion,  long  after  I  had  left  the  Civil  Service  Commission,  that  I 
was  asked  by  him  and  by  Mr.  Hitchcock,  Secretary  of  the 
Interior,  to  go  to  Muskogee,  in  what  was  then  the  Indian  Terri 
tory,  and  investigate  an  alleged  conspiracy  which,  it  was  said, 
had  resulted  in  defrauding  the  Creek  Indians  of  much  of  their 
property  in  that  town. 

The  facts  indicating  the  fraudulent  character  of  sales  made 
to  squatters  and  speculators  were  shown  by  the  testimony  of  many 
witnesses  whom  I  examined  during  my  stay  of  some  weeks  at 
Muskogee,  and  were  reported  with  my  conclusions  to  the  Inte- 


THE  MUSKOGEE  INVESTIGATION  139 

rior  Department.  But  the  most  interesting  part  of  my  experi 
ence  was  not  the  investigation  itself,  but  the  things  I  observed 
or  learned,  while  I  was  there,  regarding  the  place  and  the  com 
munity. 

The  town  was  a  remarkable  one.  It  was  at  this  time  only 
seven  or  eight  years  old  and  embodied  a  most  curious  mixture 
of  elegance  and  crudity.  The  ladies  dressed  better  than  in  any 
town  of  the  size  I  ever  saw — as  well  as  in  Washington  or  New 
York — they  sent  to  Paris  for  their  gowns;  the  theatre  was  far 
finer  than  in  most  cities  of  the  same  size.  The  people  went  to 
the  play  in  evening  dress,  but  when  you  came  out  into  the 
street  afterwards  you  found  the  carriages  bespattered  with  mud 
up  to  their  very  tops.  They  had  to  toil  through  the  sticky  clay 
hub  deep,  and  in  one  of  the  principal  streets  a  mired  horse  had 
been  pulled  out  by  a  rope  and  tackle.  In  muddy  weather  it  was 
as  impossible  to  take  a  walk  in  the  country  as  it  would  have  been 
if  the  town  had  been  an  island.  Many  of  the  men  wore  laced  boots 
that  came  nearly  to  the  knees  to  keep  the  mud  off  their 
trousers. 

There  was  a  fine,  big  jail  in  the  place,  and  it  was  brim  full. 
Every  day  or  two  you  heard  of  somebody  being  killed.  No 
liquor  was  allowed  in  the  territory,  yet  alcoholic  smells  abounded 
and  you  saw  men  reeling  in  the  streets.  If  you  asked  for  a 
glass  of  beer  you  were  told  they  had  no  beer  but  only  "Mistletoe," 
which  looked  like  it,  and  if  you  tried  it,  it  tasted  the  same  and 
produced  the  same  effect.  Everybody  was  making  money  hand 
over  fist. 

The  country  was  wonderfully  rich.  The  bottom  land  sold  for 
a  hundred  dollars  an  acre  with  practically  no  improvements. 
Oil  gas,  coal  and  other  deposits  abounded.  A  great  part  of  the 
population  followed  the  occupation  of  fleecing  Indians  or  whites 
indiscriminately.  A  man  was  called  before  a  Senate  committee 
which  was  taking  testimony  while  I  was  in  Muskogee.  He  was 
asked  what  his  business  was,  and  answered  that  he  was  a 
"grafter."  He  told  the  committee  that  he  dealt  in  titles  to  Indian 
lands,  paid  "any  old  price"  for  them  and  could  always  get 
enough  by  "clouding  a  title"  to  come  out  ahead.  He  actually 


140  LIFE  IN  WASHINGTON 

advertised  these  declarations  before  the  committee  in  order  to 
promote  his  own  business. 

But  the  Indians,  although  innocent  as  children  in  regard  to 
money  or  other  property,  were  sly  enough  in  some  ways.  For 
instance,  I  attended  a  hearing  before  this  Senate  committee  in 
which  some  of  the  old  tribesmen  made  speeches  in  the  Creek 
language,  urging  certain  requests  upon  the  Government.  Among 
the  orators  was  a  man  named  Sam  Haynes,  a  member  of  the 
"House  of  Kings"  of  the  Creek  Nation.  He  had  a  typewritten 
manuscript  before  him  and  became  very  eloquent  in  his  oration. 
A  long,  cadaverous-looking  white  man  sat  next  to  him  and  trans 
lated  it  into  English,  he  too  making  gestures  and  declaiming  as 
if  he  were  a  second  Cicero,  while  the  solemn  senatorial  owls 
upon  the  other  side  of  the  table  listened  in  silence  and  seemed 
to  be  impressed. 

A  day  or  two  afterwards  I  met  Sam  Haynes,  spoke  of  that 
manuscript  and  asked  him  whether  it  was  written  in  English  or 
Creek.  There  was  a  twinkle  in  his  eye  as  he  answered,  "It  was 
in  English."  We  had  listened  to  the  solemn  jugglery  of  trans 
lating  it  into  Creek  and  back  again  for  the  purpose  of  making  a 
deeper  impression  upon  the  Senators. 

The  white  men  in  the  neighbourhood  had  very  convincing  ways 
of  imposing  their  views  upon  those  who  were  sent  by  the  Gov 
ernment  to  do  work  in  the  territory.  One  man  came  to  appraise 
the  lots  in  a  town  not  far  away.  He  estimated  them  too  high, 
the  people  thought,  so  they  delegated  two  men  to  take  him  around 
the  corner  and  "do  him  up."  They  nearly  killed  him  on  account 
of  his  unorthodox  views  regarding  the  value  of  town  lots. 

Muskogee  was  a  hard  place  for  "investigators."  A  man  had 
been  sent  by  the  Department  of  Justice  to  investigate  the  con 
duct  of  a  Federal  judge.  He  was  a  promising  young  man  of 
good  character,  but  he  was  driven  crazy.  Some  said  they  "doped" 
him,  but  the  better  opinion  was  that  the  lawyers,  the  judge,  and 
the  newspaper  men  between  them  did  it  quite  legitimately,  as 
one  may  say;  that  is,  by  nagging  him  until  he  went  mad.  He 
had  to  leave  town  with  a  caretaker,  became  violently  insane,  and 
some  time  afterwards  jumped  from  a  two-story  window  and  killed 
himself.  That  was  one  case.  Another  inspector  who  went  there 


THE  MUSKOGEE  INVESTIGATION  141 

became  ill,  vanished,  and  soon  afterwards  died.  Another  came, 
fell  ill,  departed,  and  the  case  was  not  heard  from  again. 

But  it  must  not  be  thought  that  the  people  of  Muskogee  did 
things  so  sanguinary  and  cruel  to  all  of  us.  Milder  forms  of 
punishment  were  meted  out  for  minor  offenders.  To  most  of  us 
they  gave  what  they  called  the  "horse  laugh,"  or  perhaps  merely 
smiled  at  us  and  regarded  us  as  harmless  cranks,  beneath  con 
tempt.  In  other  parts  of  the  world  if  a  federal  inspector  came, 
hunted  up  witnesses,  and  rummaged  among  documents,  he  might 
awaken  some  awe,  or  at  least  be  treated  with  deference.  Here 
there  was  calm  derision.  The  sentiment  was,  "Investigate  and 

be  d d."  I  went  to  the  theatre  and  was  regaled  by  songs 

with  gags  regarding  "inspectors  whom  the  Government  had  paid," 
which  were  received  with  tremendous  enthusiasm  by  the  audience, 
many  of  whom  turned  around  to  laugh  at  me.  One  night  a  young 
man  and  his  best  girl  were  seated  near  me.  She  asked,  pointing 
to  me,  "Who  is  that  stranger?"  And  the  answer  was,  "He  is 
one  of  Hitchcock's  private  detectives."  If  you  reflected  that  the 
name  Hitchcock  represented  all  that  was  loathsome  to  the  hard 
working  grafters  you  might  realise  the  depth  of  infamy  to  which 
such  an  answer  consigned  me.  We  were  called  in  the  daily  press 
the  "overpaid  vassals  of  the  Secretary,"  and  there  were  squibs 
implying  that  investigations  were  as  perpetual  as  earth  and  sky. 
I  think  myself  that  the  intermissions  between  them  were  almost 
as  rare  as  the  closing  of  the  gates  of  Janus. 

Men  regaled  me  with  the  story  of  a  recent  one  where  the 
investigators  reported  that  charges  of  intoxication  of  a  late  In 
dian  agent  and  the  use  of  liquor  at  the  agency  were  unfounded. 
They  said  men  were  stationed  at  the  doors  to  prevent  the  wit 
nesses  against  the  agent  from  entering.  While  the  inspector  was 
conducting  his  enquiries  on  the  inside,  one  of  these  guardians  of 
the  portals  of  knowledge,  an  Indian  policeman,  was  so  drunk  that 
he  fell  asleep  and  reeled  over,  whereupon  a  whiskey  flask  fell  from 
his  pocket  and  broke,  spilling  the  contents  on  the  floor.  Then 
one  of  the  clerks,  who  rejoiced  in  the  appropriate  name  of  Wis 
dom,  saw  the  catastrophe  and  threw  his  overcoat  over  the  place. 
When  the  inspector  appeared  immediately  afterwards  and  asked 
what  caused  the  peculiar  odour  he  perceived,  he  was  told  it  was 


142  LIFE  IN  WASHINGTON 

the  oil  stove,  whereupon  he  observed  that  such  a  stove  ought 
to  be  removed.  The  successor  to  this  exonerated  agent  told  me 
that  the  first  thing  he  found  in  the  office  safe  was  fifteen  empty 
whiskey  bottles. 

So  the  "horse  laugh"  was  very  prevalent  there  when  I  began 
my  investigation.  But  I  doubt  whether  the  good  citizens  of 
Muskogee  would  have  stopped  at  that  if  they  had  known  what 
was  to  follow.  For  many  suits  were  begun  to  set  aside  the  illegal 
transactions  I  had  unearthed,  and  although  there  were  great 
difficulties  in  the  way  and  no  complete  restitution  was  possible, 
still  large  sums  of  money  were  recovered  for  the  Creek  Nation. 

In  conversation  with  the  judge  of  the  Federal  court  at  Musko 
gee,  I  heard  a  remarkable  tribute  to  the  truthfulness  of  the 
Indians.  He  told  me  that  in  his  experience  he  had  found  the 
negroes  extremely  untrustworthy.  Their  testimony  had  little 
value.  The  white  men  and  half-breeds  would  sometimes  tell  the 
truth,  and  sometimes  not,  but  the  full-blooded  Indian  would  never 
lie,  his  testimony  was  absolutely  reliable. 

This  tribute  has  led  me  to  wonder  whether  Indians  generally 
are  as  faithless  as  they  have  been  painted.  Treachery  has  always 
been  imputed  to  them  by  the  whites  just  as  perfidy  was  attributed 
to  the  Carthaginians  by  the  Romans  and  embodied  in  the  epithet 
'Tunic  faith."  I  can  not  but  believe  that  the  great  body  of  the 
aborigines  of  America  are  entitled  to  a  better  reputation  in  the 
matter  of  integrity  than  we  have  ever  given  them.  And  as  to 
ourselves — what  can  we  ever  say  in  defence  or  palliation  of  the 
knavery  of  many  of  our  own  race  in  their  dealings  with  these 
wards  of  the  nation? 


CHAPTER  VIII 

ROOSEVELT  AND  TAFT  CAMPAIGNS 

Lo !  he  would  lift  the  burden  from  the  weak, 
Kindle  with  hope  the  dull  eye  of  despair, 
And  for  the  common  weal  all  things  would  dare, 

Scourging  the  money-changers,  smiling,  sleek, 

Forth  from  the  temple  till  on  him  they  seek 
Impotent  vengeance.     Slanders  must  he  bear ; 
Foul  imprecations  that  infect  the  air; 

Lies,  till  the  heavy  breath  of  Heaven  doth  reek 

With  stench  of  calumny ;  the  assassin's  blow ; 
The  mockery  of  the  proud;  the  stinging  thorn 
Of  faithless  friendship;  flattery  turned  to  scorn; 

Yet  while  the  coming  years  their  gifts  bestow, 
Crowning  great  names  with  glory,  his  shall  shine 
In  the  front  rank  of  our  illustrious  line. 

— Theodore  Roosevelt. 

THE  ROOSEVELT    CAMPAIGN,    1904 

As  the  time  for  the  Presidential  election  in  1904  drew  near, 
it  seemed  clear  that  Mr.  Roosevelt  would  be  the  Republican  can 
didate.  His  administration  had  been  successful,  and  for  the  party 
to  repudiate  it  and  nominate  another  man  would  be  fraught  with" 
serious  danger.  There  were  of  course  malcontents,  especially 
among  the  "standpatters,"  and  many  Republicans  looked  back 
with  regret  to  the  time  when  the  "organisation"  had  greater  power 
and  when  their  special  interests  were  more  carefully  protected. 
Although  Mark  Hanna,  the  Warwick  of  the  McKinley  adminis 
tration,  was  much  talked  of  by  dissatisfied  politicians  as  a  candi 
date,  yet  when  the  Republican  Convention  met,  the  popular 
demand  for  Roosevelt  was  so  overwhelming  that  he  was  the  inevi 
table  choice  of  the  party.  Alton  B.  Parker  was  nominated  by  the 
Democrats.  After  my  return  from  Europe  in  the  early  fall  I 
took  an  active  part  in  the  canvass,  speaking  in  various  parts  of 
the  country. 

143 


144  ROOSEVELT  AND  TAFT  CAMPAIGNS 

One  episode  in  this  campaign  is  worth  recalling.  Mr.  Carl 
Schurz  had  published  in  September,  1904,  an  open  letter  to  inde 
pendent  voters,  in  which  he  said:  "There  are  two  Roosevelts  in 
the  field,  the  ideal,  the  legendary  Roosevelt,  as  he  once  appeared 
and  as  many  people  still  imagine  him  to  be,  and  the  real  Roose 
velt  as  he  has  since  developed.  There  are  no  doubt  many  good 
citizens  who  intend  to  vote  for  Mr.  Roosevelt,  having  the  legen 
dary  Roosevelt  in  mind,  but  they  will  do  well  to  consider  that  if 
elected,  the  real  Roosevelt  will  be  President." 

Mr.  Schurz  here  pictured  the  legendary  Roosevelt  as  a  man 
who  abhorred  and  denounced  spoils  and  immoral  practices  and 
contrasted  him  with  the  real  Roosevelt,  who  consulted  Boss  Platt 
about  public  matters,  treated  the  unspeakable  Addicks  with 
"friendly  neutrality,"  had  made  Henry  C.  Payne,  a  lobbyist  and 
political  wire-puller,  Postmaster-General,  had  appointed  Clarkson 
to  be  surveyor  of  the  Port  of  New  York,  and  had  been  actually 
praised  and  supported  by  Lou  Payn,  whom  he  had  dismissed  as 
insurance  commissioner. 

This  open  letter  incensed  me  beyond  measure.  The  continual 
talk  about  the  changes  going  on  in  Mr.  Roosevelt's  character  had 
been  making  me  weary  for  many  years.  Mr.  Roosevelt  first 
entered  public  life  in  1882,  as  a  member  of  the  New  York  Legis 
lature,  where  he  was  greatly  praised  for  his  independent  and 
fearless  course.  But  in  1884,  only  two  years  afterwards,  when 
he  voted  for  Blaine,  many  of  the  Mugwumps  lost  all  confidence  in 
him.  When  he  was  nominated  as  Mayor  of  New  York  in  1886, 
he  had  again  degenerated.  In  1890,  when  he  was  Civil  Service 
Commissioner,  they  used  to  write  to  him  "that  it  was  hopeless 
to  expect  him  to  be  true  to  his  ideals  now  that  he  had  been 
appointed  to  office."  When  he  became  Assistant  Secretary  of 
the  Navy,  they  said  there  had  been  a  great  back-sliding  from  his 
splendid  record  on  the  Civil  Service  Commission.  When  he  ran 
for  Governor  of  New  York,  he  was  utterly  given  up  by  these  sons 
of  righteousness  because  he  "took  breakfast  with  Platt."  Now 
he  had  fallen  again,  and  the  "legendary  Roosevelt"  of  the  past 
had  become  the  "real  Roosevelt."  These  repeated  descents  to 
Avernus,  if  they  had  not  been  wholly  imaginary,  would  have 
brought  him  long  before  to  some  place  far  below  the  bottomless 


THE  ROOSEVELT  CAMPAIGN,  1904  145 

pit,  yet  those  who  knew  him  well  knew  that  he  was  exactly  the 
same  Roosevelt  that  he  had  always  been. 

In  a  number  of  my  speeches,  as  well  as  in  the  public  press, 
I  thus  commented  upon  the  observations  made  by  Mr.  Schurz: 

"One  would  think  that  a  man  who  thus  deprecates  changes,  even 
those  which  are  imaginary,  would  himself  be  a  paragon  of  immutability. 
Yet  in  the  campaign  of  1896  Mr.  Schurz,  in  his  speech  of  September  5 
at  Chicago,  treating  of  free  coinage  and  Mr.  Bryan's  candidacy,  said : 

"  'The  father  who  teaches  such  moral  principles  to  his  children 
educates  them  for  fraud,  dishonour  and  the  penitentiary.  The  public 
men  who  teach  such  moral  principles  to  the  people  educate  the  people 
for  the  contempt  and  abhorrence  of  mankind.  The  nation  that  accepts 
such  moral  principles  cannot  live.  It  will  rot  to  death  in  the  loath 
some  stew  of  its  own  corruption.  If  the  nation  accepting  such  moral 
principles  be  this  republic,  it  will  deal  a  blow  to  the  credit  of  democratic 
institutions  from  which  the  cause  of  free  government  will  not  recover 
for  centuries.' 

"And  yet  after  saying  all  that,  Mr.  Schurz  voted  for  Mr.  Bryan  four 
years  later  upon  exactly  the  same  platform,  thus  helping  to  educate 
the  people  for  the  contempt  and  abhorrence  of  mankind  I"1 

The  issues  presented  by  the  Democrats  were  most  unimpressive. 
The  silver  Democrats  and  gold  Democrats  were  still  so  far  apart 
that  the  success  even  of  a  neutral  and  colourless  man  like  Mr. 
Parker  was  impossible.  Indeed,  the  extravagant  praise  bestowed 
upon  this  candidate  by  men  who  knew  nothing  about  him  or  his 
career  seemed  like  the  worship  of  the  Athenians  for  the  unknown 
god.  There  was  but  one  result  possible.  Roosevelt  was  chosen 
by  the  largest  majority  yet  given  for  any  candidate  for  the 
Presidency.  His  second  term  was  even  more  fruitful  than  the 

1  One  of  Mr.  Schurz's  friends  was  very  indignant  at  these  strictures, 
saying  that  in  the  present  platform  of  the  Democratic  Party  imperial 
ism,  and  not  free  silver,  was  the  paramount  issue,  and  that  it  was  upon 
this  that  Mr.  Schurz  had  supported  Mr.  Bryan.  This  was  true,  and 
yet  the  platform  upon  which  Mr.  Bryan  was  running  in  1000  had  dis 
tinctly  endorsed  the  free  silver  plank  that  had  been  adopted  in  1896. 
As  to  the  "paramount  issue,"  I  wondered  what  issue  could  be  para 
mount  to  one  which  would  cause  the  nation  "to  rot  to  death  in  the 
loathsome  stew  of  its  own  corruption"  and  "discredit  the  cause  of  free 
government  for  centuries." 


146  ROOSEVELT  AND  TAFT  CAMPAIGNS 

first  in  beneficent  legislation  and  in  wise  and  efficient  adminis 
tration,  and  it  was  crowned  by  an  unexampled  diplomatic  tri 
umph  in  negotiations,  conducted  upon  his  personal  responsibility, 
for  the  settlement  of  the  great  war  between  Russia  and  Japan. 


THE   TAFT   CAMPAIGN,    1908 

It  will  be  remembered  that  Roosevelt,  after  he  had  been  elected 
to  the  Presidency  at  the  expiration  of  his  first  term,  had  announced 
that  he  would  not  again  be  a  candidate,  and  during  his  second 
administration  the  question  of  his  successor  was  naturally  con 
sidered.  Roosevelt  himself  thought  that  the  two  most  desirable 
men  were  Mr.  Root  and  Mr.  Taft.  Mr.  Hughes,  the  governor  of 
New  York,  while  an  admirable  state  executive,  had  then  far  less 
knowledge  than  the  other  two  of  national  affairs  or  of  the  men 
necessary  to  conduct  them.  The  President  once  in  a  conversation 
in  the  dining-room  of  the  White  House,  after  all  the  others  had 
left,  spoke  to  me  in  the  warmest  terms  of  Mr.  Root's  ability,  but 
he  did  not  consider  that  he  possessed  the  personal  popularity 
which  would  make  him  available,  and  the  fact  that,  as  a  lawyer, 
he  had  represented  at  various  times  vast  moneyed  interests  in 
Wall  Street  made  it  doubtful  whether  he  would  be  an  acceptable 
candidate  to  the  West.  Mr.  Taft,  whose  frank  and  genial  nature 
made  him  universally  esteemed,  had  been  a  warm  and  able  sup 
porter  of  the  President's  policies,  and  the  President  said  he 
believed  that  on  the  whole  he  would  be  the  most  desirable 
candidate. 

As  the  time  approached  for  the  Republican  Convention,  the 
preference  of  President  Roosevelt  for  Mr.  Taft  was  openly  de 
clared,  and  by  reason  of  this  it  was  charged  that  the  President 
was  not  only  trying  to  force  this  nomination  upon  the  party,  but 
was  using  Government  appointments  for  that  purpose  and  was 
coercing  Federal  employees  on  behalf  of  his  candidate.  The 
charges  were  sufficient  to  draw  from  him  an  elaborate  statement 
of  the  character  of  his  appointments  and  the  principles  upon 
which  he  acted,  and  at  a  later  period  an  investigating  committee 
of  the  National  Civil  Service  Reform  League,  to  which  he  turned 
over  his  appointment  lists  for  examination,  reported  that  not  only 


THE  TAFT  CAMPAIGN,  1908  147 

were  appointments  made  in  the  usual  manner  on  the  recommenda 
tion  of  Congressmen,  but  sometimes  of  Congressmen  who  were 
notoriously  opposed  to  Mr.  Taft,  and  that  the  charges  were  not 
substantiated.2 

An  illustration  of  the  manner  in  which  the  patronage  charges 
against  Roosevelt  were  made  is  shown  by  the  following  correspond 
ence.  I  was  spending  the  summer  at  Watch  Hill,  from  which  place 
on  August  2,  1908, 1  wrote  to  the  President  as  follows: 

"A  curious  cock-and-bull  story  is  going  the -rounds  here.  In  spite 
of  being  known  as  your  friend,  I  am  a  member  (I  believe  in  good 
standing)  of  The  Ananias  Club'  at  this  place.  It  was  declared  in 
open  session  the  other  night  that  you  had  purchased  the  support  of 
the  delegation  from  Connecticut  for  Mr.  Taft  by  the  appointment  of 
a  Federal  judge  in  that  State.  This  was  stated  by  a  gentleman  who 
was  himself  a  delegate  to  the  Chicago  Convention,  and  two  other  mem 
bers  of  the  Club  declared  they  had  personal  knowledge  of  the  fact 
that  you  had  promised  the  appointment  to  a  Mr.  Beach,  whom  you 
selected  to  reward  him  for  his  work  in  the  celebrated  Danbury  case 
and  to  show  your  independence  of  the  Connecticut  senators;  but  that 
you  found  you  could  not  get  a  Taft  delegation  from  Connecticut  unless 
you  made  the  appointment  recommended  by  the  senators,  which  you 
accordingly  did.  The  celerr'y  with  which  this  tale  was  accepted  would 
be  worthy  of  Wall  Street." 

To  this  he  answered  on  the  following  day: 

"I  don't  suppose  that  there  was  a  contested  appointment  that  came 
up  during  the  last  year  as  regards  which  some  people  did  not,  on  be 
half  of  each  candidate,  assert  that  to  appoint  him  would  help  in  the 
nomination  of  Taft;  and  it  is  perfectly  possible  that  such  a  statement 
was  made  as  regards  the  judge  whom  I  appointed  in  Connecticut, 
whose  name  I  for  the  moment  forget.  But  if  so,  I  don't  remember 
it.  Indeed,  I  should  be  inclined  to  think  that  it  was  far  more  probable 
that  it  was  made  as  regards  Mr.  Beach.  I  of  course  never  promised 
to  appoint  Beach,  and  whoever  says  I  did  promise  lies  out  of  hand. 
I  distrust  both  of  the  Connecticut  Senators,  and  especially  distrust 
their  recommendations  in  judicial  matters,  and  therefore  I  took  up  my 
investigation  into  possible  judges  in  Connecticut  on  my  own  initiative. 
I  found  out  that  there  were  four  or  five  candidates  of  whom  men 

2  See  "Fighting  the  Spoilsmen,"  pp.  209,  210. 


148  ROOSEVELT  AND  TAFT  CAMPAIGNS 

spoke  very  well,  one  of  these  being  a  former  partner  of  one  Senator, 
and  I  was  informed  that  this  fact  would  insure  his  being  supported 
by  the  Senators,  and  that  I  should  be  very  fortunate  if  I  could  get 
him.  At  first  I  was  inclined  to  think  Mr.  Beach  the  better  man,  Hadley 
recommending  him  very  strongly.  I  had  Herbert  Knox  Smith  inves 
tigate,  and  he  agreed  with  Hadley  that  Beach  would  be  the  better 
man,  but  also  reported  strongly  in  favour  of  the  other  man,  the  man 
whom  I  actually  did  appoint.  Clark,  the  editor  of  the  Courant,  and 
Alsop,  a  young  fellow,  a  Yale  man,  a  farmer,  the  leader  of  the  Inde 
pendents  in  the  Connecticut  Legislature,  wrote  to  me  very  strongly 
in  behalf  of  the  judge  whom  I  actually  appointed.  I  then  made  a 
very  careful  investigation.  I  came  to  the  conclusion  that  the  men 
were  of  substantially  equal  merit;  indeed,  that  possibly  Beach  was 
not  quite  as  good  as  the  other  man,  and  that  under  such  circumstances 
it  would  be  unwise  to  get  into  a  fight  with  the  two  Senators  where  I 
should  certainly  be  beaten,  and  where  the  great  bulk  of  my  sup 
porters  in  Connecticut  itself  would  feel  that  I  was  in  error  and  was 
influenced,  not  by  a  desire  to  get  a  first-class  judge,  but  by  a  desire 
to  see  my  man  appointed  instead  of  the  Senators'  man.  In  short,  I 
followed  exactly  the  same  course  that  I  have  followed  every 
where. 

"You  are  entirely  at  liberty  to  read  this  letter  to  any  one  of  those 
who  made  the  statement  to  you,  including  especially  the  man  who  was 
a  delegate  to  the  Chicago  Convention,  and  the  two  other  members 
of  the  Club  who  declared  they  had  personal  knowledge  of  the  facts. 
You  may  tell  them  from  me  that  their  statements  are  deliberate  and 
wilful  falsehoods,  if  they  said,  as  you  report,  that  I  had  promised  the 
appointment  to  Mr.  Beach,  but  found  I  could  not  get  a  Taft  delega 
tion  from  Connecticut  unless  I  made  the  appointment  recommended  by 
the  Senators,  which  I  accordingly  did.  The  ludicrousness  of  the  false 
hood  is  made  plain  by  the  fact,  of  which  the  men  responsible  must 
be  fully  aware,  that  the  two  Senators  remained  always  hostile  to  Taft, 
never  to  me  nor  to  any  one  else  said  they  would  support  him  or  get 
the  delegation  for  him,  and  that  we  finally  got  the  delegation  for  Taft 
against  their  efforts,  and  actually  left  them  at  home  because  they 
weren't  for  Taft.  In  short,  the  statement  is  a  lie  from  beginning  to 
end.  I  always  counted  upon  the  hostility  of  the  Senators  to  Taft. 
I  originally  expected  them  to  recommend  a  candidate  for  judge  whom 
I  could  not  appoint,  and  when  I  finally  became  convinced  that  the 
candidate  whom  they  recommended  was  substantially  as  good  as,  and 
was  thought  by  a  number  of  the  best  men  to  be  better  than,  any  other 
candidate  considered,  I  did  as  I  have  always  done  with  all  other 
Senators  in  like  cases  and  made  the  appointment.  I  shall  be  interested 
to  hear  what  your  informants  have  to  say  when  this  statement  is  made 
to  them." 


THE  TAFT  CAMPAIGN,  1908  149 

I  replied  as  follows: 

"I  submitted  your  letter  regarding  the  Connecticut  judgeship  to  my 
three  informants.  The  first  said  that  your  promise  to  appoint  Beach 
was  contained  in  a  letter  to  Hadley,  which  my  informant  had  not  seen 
but  which  Hadley  had  interpreted  as  a  promise,  and  was  much  disap 
pointed  when  Noyes  was  chosen.  My  informant  admitted,  however, 
that  he  knew  nothing  about  the  appointment  being  made  for  the  pur 
pose  of  securing  the  Connecticut  delegation  for  Taft. 

"The  gentleman  who  was  a  delegate  to  the  Chicago  Convention,  upon 
being  informed  of  your  letter,  insisted  that  it  should  be  read  before 
the  Ananias  Club,  as  a  whole,  as  they  had  heard  his  original  statement, 
so  I  read  the  letter  to  them,  changing,  however,  the  one  'little  ugly 
word,'  a  'lie,'  to  the  word  'untrue,'  which  I  think  does  not  substantially 
affect  the  meaning.  The  delegate  then  said  that  a  certain  person  whom 
he  declined  to  name  had  been  to  see  you  and  had  told  you  that  if  you 
appointed  Beach,  whom  you  then  proposed  to  appoint,  you  could  not 
get  the  delegation  for  Taft  and  that  when  you  afterwards  appointed 
Noyes,  there  were  many  who  believed  that  this  was  the  reason  you 
had  done  it.  I  answered  that  it  might  be  that  many  believed  that,  but 
the  important  question  was,  'Was  it  true?'  He  answered  that  he 
believed  so  too,  and  I  replied  that  since  he  discredited  your  statement 
as  to  the  reasons  for  the  appointment,  he  must  pardon  us  if  some  of 
us  did  not  believe  him. 

"The  third  gentleman  said  that  he  had  heard  substantially  the  same 
thing,  that  he  had  believed  that  the  purpose  of  your  appointment  was 
to  secure  a  Taft  delegation,  but  that  your  letter  was  a  strong  one  and 
threw  a  different  light  upon  the  matter. 

"With  two  other  exceptions,  I  think  the  Club  generally  was  upon  my 
side  of  the  controversy.  I  would  not  have  brought  such  a  subject 
before  you  at  all  except  that  I  thought  some  question  about  it  might 
arise  later  and  that  it  might  be  well  to  nip  it  in  the  bud  as  far  as 
possible." 

To  this  the  President  rejoined: 

"I  have  your  letter  of  August  6th.  There  is  nothing  to  say  as  to 
the  second  and  third  of  your  informants.  Neither  of  them  specifies 
anything  which  it  would  be  possible  either  to  prove  or  refute.  I  can 
not  answer  a  man  who  says  that  'a  certain  person,'  whom  he  declines 
to  name,  has  been  to  see  me,  especially  when  he  says  that  it  was  that 
man  himself,  and  not  I,  who  made  the  statement  that  if  I  appointed 
Beach  I  could  not  get  the  delegation  for  Taft.  Now  as  to  your  first 
informant,  who  said  that  my  promise  to  appoint  Beach  was  contained 
in  a  letter  to  Hadley  which  he  had  not  seen,  but  which  Hadley 


150  ROOSEVELT  AND  TAFT  CAMPAIGNS 

interpreted  as  a  promise,  and  was  much  disappointed  when  Noyes  was 
chosen.    Following  I  give  you  all  the  letters  I  wrote  Hadley."  .  .  . 

Here  follow  the  letters,  in  which  no  promise  was  contained. 
The  President  thus  concluded: 

"You  are  welcome  to  show  all  this  to  your  informant  and  ask  him 
just  what  he  can  find  in  the  correspondence  that  would  in  the  remotest 
way  imply  a  promise  on  my  part  to  appoint  Beach  or  any  attitude 
as  to  which  exception  could  be  taken." 

To  this  no  further  rejoinder  was  made. 

There  was  indeed  much  political  manipulation  in  the  Repub 
lican  Convention  by  the  friends  of  various  candidates.  But  the 
most  flagrant  cases  were  among  the  supporters  of  other  candi 
dates  than  Mr.  Taft.  Many  of  the  States  had  "favourite  sons." 
Among  these  was  Indiana,  where  Mr.  Fairbanks  was  supported 
by  the  political  organisation  of  the  State.  Mr.  Taft,  however, 
was  nominated.  His  Democratic  competitor  was  Mr.  Bryan. 


CHAPTER  IX 

THE  PROGRESSIVE  MOVEMENT 

THEY  left  behind  the  slime  of  things  unclean — 

The  welded  power  of  gold,  the  spoils  of  place, 
The  subtle  bonds  of  government  unseen — 

To  lift  the  helpless  and  redeem  the  base. 
They  had  a  vision.     Has  it  passed  away 

To  be  forgot  and  known  of  men  no  more? 
Not  so.     It  only  hides  its  face  to-day 

To  rise  to-morrow  statelier  than  before. 
And  he,  their  chieftain  by  diviner  right 

Than  any  king  on  earth — his  banner  furled — 
Though  he  no  longer  lead  them  in  the  fight 

For  ampler  justice  and  a  better  world, 
•Justice  shall  come  although  her  feet  be  slow, 
And  fairer  springs  shall  blossom  than  we  know. 

— Progressives. 

THE  TAFT   ADMINISTRATION 

Mr.  Taft  was  elected  by  an  overwhelming  majority.  The  con 
vention  which  had  nominated  him  was  emphatically  a  Roosevelt 
convention,  and  the  platform  adopted  opened  with  the  declara 
tion  that  the  Republican  Party  had  reached  its  highest  service 
under  Mr.  Roosevelt's  leadership;  and  after  reciting  in  detail  the 
things  he  had  accomplished,  added: 

We  declare  our  unfaltering  adherence  to  the  policies  thus  inaugurated 
and  pledge  their  continuance  under  a  Republican  administration  of  the 
government 

It  was  upon  this  platform  that  Mr.  Taft  had  been  elected,  and 
the  American  people  expected  him  to  carry  out  the  Roosevelt 
policies.  Almost  immediately  after  the  inauguration,  Mr.  Roose 
velt  started  upon  his  African  expedition.  He  thus  made  himself 
quite  inaccessible  and  left  Mr.  Taft  free  to  carry  out  his  pledges 

151 


152  THE  PROGRESSIVE  MOVEMENT 

in  his  own  way,  unfettered  by  any  kind  of  pressure  from  his 
predecessor. 

But  even  before  Taft  was  inaugurated  there  were  strong  influ 
ences  around  him  urging  him  not  to  make  his  administration  "the 
mere  echo"  of  President  Roosevelt's,  and  assuring  him  that  by  an 
independent  course  he  could  allay  the  conflict  between  the  special 
interests  and  the  people,  as  well  as  the  discord  in  his  own  party, 
and  that  in  this  way  he  could  transcend  the  achievements  of  his 
predecessor.  The  same  thing  had  occurred  when  Roosevelt  be 
came  President.  He  tells  us  in  his  autobiography  (p.  381)  of  the 
friends  who  warned  him  against  becoming  a  "pale  copy  of  Mc- 
Kinley."  But  Roosevelt  was  not  afraid  of  this,  and  he  not  only 
declared  that  he  would  continue  McKinley's  policies,  but  he  even 
kept  in  office  the  whole  of  McKinley's  Cabinet.  Mr.  Taft,  how 
ever,  made  radical  changes  among  his  advisers  and  soon  became 
closely  affiliated  with  many  who  had  attempted  to  thwart  the 
policies  of  his  predecessor. 

During  Mr.  Roosevelt's  administration  the  revision  of  the  tariff 
had  been  crowded  out  by  more  pressing  issues.  There  was,  how 
ever,  a  widespread  feeling  that  many  of  the  schedules  were  unjust, 
that  they  had  encouraged  the  formation  of  monopolies  and  the 
acquisition  of  vast  fortunes,  and  had  laid  unnecessary  burdens 
upon  the  consumers.  The  Republican  Convention  accordingly 
promised  "a  revision  of  the  tariff  by  a  special  session  of  Congress 
immediately  following  the  inauguration  of  the  next  Presi 
dent." 

A  revision  is  not  necessarily  a  reduction,  but  the  purpose  of 
these  words  was  to  allay  the  widespread  dissatisfaction  of  those 
who  insisted  that  the  tariff  was  too  high.  There  were  some  thirty 
or  more  so-called  "insurgents"  in  the  House  of  Representatives 
who  believed  that  Speaker  Cannon  was  so  closely  identified  with 
the  trusts  and  protected  interests  that  a  satisfactory  revision  of 
the  tariff  could  not  be  made  under  his  leadership.  The  feeling 
was  widespread  throughout  the  Middle  West  that  this  was  the 
case.  When  the  insurgents  tried  to  defeat  Cannon  for  the  speak- 
ership,  Mr.  Taft  endeavoured  to  induce  them  to  desist.  This  led 
to  severe  criticism,  and  as  much  of  it  came  from  my  own  State 
I  thought  I  ought  to  inform  the  President  of  the  feeling  which 


THE  PAYNE-ALDRICH  TARIFF  BILL  153 

existed  there.  I  had  always  been  in  the  habit  of  speaking  thus 
frankly  to  President  Roosevelt,  and  as  my  relations  with  Mr.  Taft 
were  friendly,  I  presumed  I  might  do  the  same  thing  with  him,  and 
a  few  days  after  his  inauguration  I  wrote  him  at  some  length  about 
the  state  of  public  opinion  in  the  West,  and  especially  in  Indiana; 
of  the  resentment  felt  towards  Cannon  for  his  former  obstruction 
ist  tactics  and  for  his  support  of  the  protected  interests.  I  told 
him  that  he,  Mr.  Taft,  was  suspected  (although  this  was  "utterly 
unreasonable")  of  being  out  of  sympathy  with  the  progressive 
element  and  of  favouring  Cannon's  control ;  that  this  growing  dis 
trust  was  being  openly  voiced  by  prominent  Republican  papers 
in  the  State,  and  added  that  I  thought  it  was  only  fair  that  he 
should  have  an  honest  statement  of  certain  opinions  widely  held, 
no  matter  how  much  injustice  these  did  him  personally. 

I  found,  however,  from  his  answer  (which,  being  confidential, 
I  am  not  at  liberty  to  quote)  that  he  had  taken  my  letter  as  a 
personal  reflection;  and  he  ended  his  reply  with  a  rather  sharp 
criticism  upon  "unreasonable  reformers."  Perhaps  I  had  ex 
pressed  myself  too  bluntly,  but  evidently  here  was  a  man  who 
took  friendly,  though  unpalatable,  information  in  quite  a  differ 
ent  spirit  from  that  of  Roosevelt.  I  replied  to  him  as  follows: 

To  THE  PRESIDENT.  March  15,  1909. 

DEAR  SIR: 

You  have  quite  misunderstood  my  letter  of  the  loth.  I  did  not  in 
the  least  question  that  you  were  doing  exactly  right  as  to  Cannon, 
but  I  told  you  what  the  people  were  saying.  I  did  not  presume  to 
advise  you,  but  will  say  now  that  if  you  would  tell  the  whole  country 
what  you  have  just  said  in  your  letter  to  me,  it  would  do  much  to 
keep  intact  that  general  confidence  which  is  now  unreasonably  and 
prematurely  wavering.  I  think  you  are  dead  right  as  to  "reformers." 
I  did  not  write  as  such,  but,  as  I  have  been  accustomed  from  long 
friendship  to  saying  a  lot  of  unpleasant  things  to  President  Roosevelt, 
I  thought  I  might  serve  you  by  giving  you  a  disinterested  statement  of 
what  I  knew. 

THE   PAYNE-ALDRICH   TARIFF    BILL 

At  the  special  session  beginning  March  n,  1909,  just  after 
Mr.  Taft's  inauguration,  the  Payne-Aldrich  Tariff  Bill  was  intro 
duced. 


154  THE  PROGRESSIVE  MOVEMENT 

In  July,  while  the  bill  was  still  pending,  the  President  wrote 
me  quite  a  long  letter  discussing  many  of  the  schedules  and 
expressing  the  hope  that  the  reductions  made  in  the  Senate 
would  produce  a  bill  which  would  substantially  comply  with  the 
promise  of  "downward  revision."  But  the  feeling  throughout 
the  country  was  almost  universal  against  the  proposed  law,  and 
the  press  with  great  unanimity  denounced  it.  The  President 
finally  signed  the  bill  as  passed  and  began  a  speaking  tour  through 
the  country  in  support  of  it.  He  made  at  Winona,  Min 
nesota,  a  speech  declaring  that  the  Payne-Aldrich  Act  was  the 
best  tariff  bill  ever  passed  and  that  there  should  be  no  further 
changes.  The  people  would  perhaps  have  acquiesced  in  Mr.  Taft's 
signing  the  bill,  when  the  only  alternative  was  to  leave  in  exist 
ence  a  law  which  was  as  bad  or  worse,  but  his  praise  of  the 
measure  and  its  designers  was  more  than  they  could  stand.  There 
was  condemnation  everywhere,  and  undeterred  by  my  previous 
epistolary  experience  I  determined  once  more  to  let  him  know 
what  was  the  feeling  of  my  own  section.  I  therefore  addressed 
to  him  the  following  letter: 


RICHMOND,  IND.,  November  10,  1009. 
To  THE  PRESIDENT. 
DEAR  SIR: 

I  dislike  to  bring  bad  tidings,  for  I  know  the  fate  of  those  who  do, 
but  the  best  office  your  friend  can  perform  is  to  tell  you  the  truth. 
The  sentiment  in  Indiana,  and  I  think  in  all  this  region,  is  more  abso 
lutely  unanimous  against  your  Winona  position,  that  there  should  be 
no  further  changes  in  the  tariff  during  your  administration,  than  I 
have  ever  known  it  to  be  on  any  other  subject  in  my  life.  The  idea 
of  waiting  to  see  how  the  tariff  works  is  well  enough,  as  to  contro 
verted  questions,  but  as  to  a  matter  like  the  woollen  schedule  where 
your  own  remarks  show  that  the  bill  was  iniquitous,  it  cannot  apply. 
Your  criticism  of  the  insurgents  in  your  Winona  speech  has  seemed  to 
our  people  particularly  unhappy.  ...  I  have  myself,  editing  an  inde 
pendent  newspaper,  refrained  from  any  criticism  of  your  position  on 
this  question,  but  I  find  the  Republican  party  organs,  both  in  this 
town  and  all  over  the  State,  are  criticising  you  in  no  measured  terms 
and  making  most  invidious  comparisons  between  your  administration 
and  that  of  your  predecessor.  The  plain  fact  is  that  you  are  rapidly 
losing  your  hold  on  our  people,  and  those  of  us  who  deprecate  the 
inevitable  alternative  feel  called  upon  to  lift  our  voices  in  protest.  I 


THE  PAYNE-ALDRICH  TARIFF  BILL  155 

do  not  talk  this  way  to  anybody  else,  but  it  is  due  to  you  to  know 
the  facts.  .  .  . 

The  President  answered  on  November  18  the  above  letter,  and 
marked  the  answer  personal.  He  must,  however,  have  shown  it, 
as  well  as  my  own  letter,  to  others,  for  on  the  following  Saturday 
there  appeared  in  the  Cincinnati  Times-Star,  a  newspaper  owned 
by  Charles  P.  Taft,  the  President's  half-brother,  an  article  con 
taining  in  garbled  form  the  purport  of  much  of  the  President's 
answer,  and  ridiculing  my  criticisms  upon  his  action. 

The  article  added: 

"The  correspondence  has  not  been  made  public.  But  if  Mr.  Foulke 
should  happen  to  make  it  public  it  would  present  in  the  most  interest 
ing  fashion  the  position  that  has  been  taken  by  some  of  the  Presi 
dent's  critics  and  the  position  taken  by  the  President  himself.  And 
neither  of  them  has  anything  to  conceal." 

I  naturally  felt  surprised  that  the  President  should  have  treated 
the  correspondence  in  this  way  and  on  November  26  I  wrote  to 
him,  enclosing  the  article  in  the  Times-Star,  and  added  that  he 
who  asked  that  a  correspondence  be  kept  personal  should  keep  it 
so  himself,  and  that  if  it  were  allowed  to  escape,  care  should  be 
taken  that  it  be  fairly  stated;  and  that  in  this  case  even  a  garbled 
version  ought  to  be  free  from  the  injurious  imputation  that  I  was 
capable  of  publishing  a  personal  letter  from  him  without  his 
authority. 

To  this  letter  the  President  answered: 

I  was  as  much  surprised  as  you  to  see  any  notice  of  our  correspond 
ence  in  the  newspapers.  I  see  very  few  newspaper  men  myself ;  but  I 
presume  that  in  discussing  the  situation  in  Indiana  I  may  have  recited 
to  people  who  are  interested  some  of  the  correspondence,  without  the 
slightest  intention  of  having  it  published.  This,  I  understand  from  my 
secretary,  is  the  way  in  which  the  matter  was  probably  brought  to  the 
attention  of  the  public.  I  cannot  be  responsible  for  the  correspondent 
of  the  Times-Star  or  for  the  correspondent  of  any  other  newspaper. 
All  I  can  do  is  to  regret  that  that  which  was  intended  to  be  private 
correspondence  was  made  public. 

One  would  not  have  thought  that  after  one  such  experience, 
another  like  it  would  occur,  but  in  the  February  following  Mr. 


156  THE  PROGRESSIVE  MOVEMENT 

Lucius  B.  Swift  took  occasion  to  send  to  the  President  a  remon 
strance  somewhat  similar  to  mine,  which  the  President  answered 
in  like  fashion,  in  a  confidential  letter.  What  was  Mr.  Swift's 
surprise  to  see  public  comments  of  the  same  kind,  and  on 
March  2d  the  President  sent  to  Mr.  Swift  the  following  letter: 

MY  DEAR  MR.  SWIFT  : 

I  owe  you  an  apology  for  your  being  troubled  by  queries  from 
correspondents  and  reporters  in  respect  to  the  letter  I  wrote  you  the 
other  day.  I  do  not  know  certainly  how  the  fact  got  out  that  I  had 
written  to  you,  but  I  must  infer  that  it  is  from  a  conversation  I  had 
with  two  Indiana  men,  of  a  confidential  character.  They  have  merely 
betrayed  my  confidence — that  is  all — for  purposes  of  their  own,  appar 
ently  and  have  given  out  what  they  could  gather  from  my  statement 
of  the  correspondence.  The  statement  was  made  in  a  discussion  as 
to  conditions  in  Indiana.  When  I  say  this  I  am  merely  stating  my 
suspicion  in  respect  to  the  matter,  but  what  I  wish  you  to  understand 
is  that  I  had  no  intention  of  allowing  the  matter  to  be  published  or  to 
have  you  troubled  by  it. 

My  conclusions  above  stated  are  fortified  by  a  somewhat  similar 
and  almost  coincidental  experience  with  Dudley  Foulke,  and  the  only 
source  of  publicity  must  have  been  through  the  individuals  whom  I 
have  in  mind. 

Very  sincerely  yours, 

WM.  H.  TAFT. 

The  foregoing  correspondence  illustrates  a  characteristic  of 
Mr.  Taft  which  probably  led  more  than  any  other  to  disaster  in 
his  administration.  He  trusted  those  who  betrayed  him.  In  this 
case  he  was  surrounded  by  men  who,  because  they  had  axes  of 
their  own  to  grind,  assured  him  that  public  opinion  was  all  with 
him.  These  men  swarmed  around  him  while  the  people  who 
thought  otherwise  remained  away.  A  small  object  which  is  close 
at  hand  can  hide  a  much  greater  one  which  is  distant.  So  it  came 
to  pass  that  Mr.  Taft  did  not  know  what  was  the  actual  feeling 
of  the  great  body  of  his  fellow-citizens.  He  saw  little  even  of 
the  newspapers  that  criticised  him,  and  he  adopted  the  unfortunate 
theory  that  their  opposition  to  the  Payne- Aldrich  Bill  was  mainly 
due  to  the  tariff  it  imposed  on  the  wood  pulp  used  in  the  manu 
facture  of  their  papers! 

The  President  was  not  content  with  reminding  the  Progressives 


BALLINGER— ROOSEVELT'S  RETURN  157 

(as  he  had  done  in  his  Winona  speech)  that  the  Republican  Party 
would  bring  to  bear  upon  them  that  sort  of  public  opinion  which 
"would  result  in  solid  party  action,"  but  he  afterwards  deprived 
insurgent  Congressmen  of  patronage  in  order  to  punish  them. 
This  fact  was  shown  in  the  so-called  Norton  letter  written  by 
the  President's  secretary  on  September  15,  1910,  which  stated  that 

"The  President  felt  it  to  be  his  duty  to  the  party  and  to  the  country 
to  withhold  patronage  from  certain  Senators  and  Congressmen  who 
seemed  to  be  in  opposition  to  the  Administration's  efforts  to  carry  out 
the  party  platform." 

This  letter  became  public  through  an  accident  and  was  criti 
cised  as  an  attempt  to  control  legislation  by  patronage.  It  meant 
in  substance,  "Vote  as  I  want  you  to  or  you  shall  have  no  offices 
to  distribute,"  which  is  spoils  doctrine  pure  and  simple.  But  the 
President's  secretary  added: 

"That  attitude,  however,  ended  with  the  primary  elections  and 
nominating  conventions  which  have  now  been  held  and  in  which  the 
voters  have  had  opportunity  to  declare  themselves." 

The  meaning  of  this  was  that  the  President  was  willing  to  yield 
when  he  found  that  the  votes  were  against  him. 


BALLINGER — ROOSEVELT'S   RETURN 

The  differences  between  Mr.  Taft  and  the  Progressives  were 
not  confined  to  the  tariff.  Controversies  arose  in  regard  to  the 
conservation  policy  inaugurated  by  Roosevelt  and  endorsed  by 
the  Republican  Convention.  President  Taft  made  an  unfortu 
nate  mistake  in  appointing  Richard  A.  Ballinger  Secretary  of  the 
Interior  as  the  successor  to  James  R.  Garfield  and  in  removing 
Gifford  Pinchot  from  the  Forestry  Bureau.  These  controversies 
still  further  separated  the  President  from  the  Progressive  members 
of  his  party,  to  which  group  Garfield  and  Pinchot  belonged. 

In  the  meantime  (in  June,  1910)  Mr.  Roosevelt  had  returned 
from  his  African  and  European  journey.  He  was  disappointed  at 
the  President's  course  and  believed  it  would  hurt  the  Republican 
Party,  but  during  a  visit  which  Lucius  B.  Swift  and  I  paid  to 


158  THE  PROGRESSIVE  MOVEMENT 

him  at  Oyster  Bay  he  told  us  that  he  hoped  his  friends  would  not 
do  anything  which  would  make  their  ultimate  support  of  Mr. 
Taft  impossible,  since  it  was  extremely  likely  that  he  would  be 
renominated,  although  it  was  not  probable  that  he  would  be 
re-elected.  At  that  time  and  for  some  time  afterwards  Mr. 
Roosevelt  had  no  intention  of  running  for  the  presidency  himself. 
It  seemed  clear  that  Mr.  Taft's  policy  was  not  to  the  liking  of 
the  people.  In  the  election  of  1910  the  Democrats  gained  heavily 
in  the  House  of  Representatives,  though  the  Progressive  candi 
dates  suffered  less  than  others.  The  breach  between  them  and 
the  President  kept  growing  wider  until  finally  a  measure  to  reduce 
the  tariff  was  passed  by  a  coalition  of  Democrats  and  Progressives 
and  vetoed  by  the  President.1 


THE  REPUBLICAN   NOMINATION   IN    IQI2 

In  opposition  to  Mr.  Taft's  views,  Col.  Roosevelt  declared  him 
self  a  Progressive.  Since  he  had  declined  to  be  a  candidate  and 
had  asked  his  friends  to  see  to  it  that  no  movement  was  made  to 
bring  him  forward,  a  conference  of  Progressive  Republicans  en 
dorsed  Senator  La  Follette.  But  a  speaking  tour  throughout  the 
country  had  ended  disastrously  for  him,  and  it  was  found  that  his 
candidacy  was  impossible.  There  was  now  no  one  else  to  lead  the 
Progressives  with  any  chance  of  success,  and  Roosevelt  at  last, 
in  the  latter  part  of  February,  1912,  declared  that  "his  hat  was 
in  the  ring,"  and  that  he  had  determined  to  make  the  race. 

He  was  at  once  accused  of  ingratitude  to  Taft.  The  matter  was 
considered  as  if  it  were  a  question  of  personal  obligation  and  not 
of  public  duty.  Yet  it  was  Taft  who  had  pledged  himself  to 
carry  out  the  Roosevelt  policies;  and  it  was  Roosevelt  who  had 
returned  from  Africa  to  find  the  President  allied  with  his  former 
opponents.  Was  Roosevelt  now  to  discredit  his  own  record,  or 
was  he  to  hold  up  the  standard  he  had  always  maintained?  If 
personal  obligations  could  be  considered,  it  was  Taft  and  not 
Roosevelt  who  had  first  disregarded  them.  But  the  demands  of 
public  duty  ought  in  any  event  to  be  paramount. 


1  As  to  the  Trust  question,  see  Chap.  X,  infra. 


THE  REPUBLICAN  NOMINATION  IN  1912        159 

Mr.  Taft  seemed  to  be  quite  unconscious  of  the  real  character 
of  his  political  companionships.  He  declared  in  a  conversation 
with  an  Indiana  man,  "I  am  just  as  much  opposed  to  bosses  as 
is  your  own  wild  fanatic,  the  untamed  Col.  Wm.  Dudley  Foulke."  z 

And  yet  men  like  Penrose,  Cannon,  Aldrich,  Lorimer,  Guggen 
heim,  Hemenway,  Gallinger,  even  George  B.  Cox,  the  boss  of 
Cincinnati,  and  other  politicians  of  similar  character,  were  work 
ing  with  all  their  might  to  get  him  nominated.  They  wanted 
an  "opponent"  with  whom  they  could  get  on  comfortably. 

It  was  about  this  time  that  Roosevelt  addressed  the  Constitu 
tional  Convention  of  Ohio,  then  sitting  at  Columbus,  and  spoke 
in  favour  of  direct  primaries  and  of  the  initiative,  referendum 
and  recall,  including  the  recall  of  decisions  and  even  of  judges. 
This  last  proposition  exposed  him  to  widespread  criticism.3 

There  was  a  vigorous  contest  in  the  primaries  and  in  the  dis 
trict  nominating  conventions  between  the  Taft  men  and  the 


2  Mr.  Taft  always  called  me  "Colonel,"  but  unless  such  a  title  from 
the  Commander-in-Chief  gave  me  a  sort  of  brevet  rank,  I  certainly 
could  lay  no  claim  to  it. 

3  On  March  7th,  1912,  I  wrote  him  as  follows  in  regard  to  it: 

MY  DEAR  MR.  ROOSEVELT: 

.  .  .  On  one  point  only  am  I  not  prepared  to  follow,  and  that  is  the 
recall  of  the  judges.  Impeachment,  as  you  say,  is  a  failure,  but  im 
peachment  need  not  be  the  only  remedy  to  secure  the  removal  of  an 
incompetent  or  unjust  judge.  The  Supreme  Court  may  well  be  made 
the  tribunal  for  all  inferior  judges,  leaving  only  the  judges  of  that 
high  tribunal  themselves  unaffected.  These  might  be  removed  on  a 
complaint  by  the  executive  and  a  finding  by  the  Legislature,  much  like 
the  present  Massachusetts  plan,  except  that  some  definite  charges  ought 
to  be  formulated  and  found  true  before  judges  are  removed.  The  evil 
wrought  by  an  occasional  unjust,  corrupt,  or  incompetent  judge  seems 
to  me  less  than  that  attending  a  recall,  which  would  inevitably  tend  to 
make  a  coward  of  every  judge  whenever  he  is  called  upon  to  do  an 
unpopular  thing. 

To  this  he  answered : 

DEAR  FOULKE: 

My  attitude  on  the  recall  is  exactly  yours.  As  I  said  in  the  Colum 
bus  speech,  I  don't  want  to  come  to  it,  if  there  is  any  other  way  of 


160  THE  PROGRESSIVE  MOVEMENT 

Roosevelt  men.  Wherever  the  question  was  submitted  to  the 
Republican  voters,  as  in  Pennsylvania,  Illinois,  and  even  in  Mr. 
Taft's  own  State  of  Ohio,  Roosevelt  carried  all  before  him.  But 
the  State  and  district  conventions,  manipulated  as  they  were  by 
political  leaders,  were  generally  for  Taft.  Thus  in  Indianapolis 
the  local  chairman  declared  that  the  Roosevelt  men  would  not 
be  allowed  to  carry  a  single  ward!  He  excluded  the  Roosevelt 
watchers  from  the  polls,  the  primaries  were  packed,  and  Roose 
velt  did  not  get  a  single  Indianapolis  delegate  to  the  State  Con 
vention.  In  that  convention  men  who  were  fraudulently  elected 
were  allowed  to  sit  in  judgment  upon  each  other's  credentials, 
and  thus  delegates  at  large  were  chosen  to  the  national  conven 
tion.  In  other  States,  Washington,  California,  Texas,  Alabama, 
and  elsewhere,  similar  frauds  were  committed. 

The  campaign  soon  became  bitter  and  personal.  Charges  were 
made  by  Roosevelt  and  Taft  against  each  other.  Taft  declared 
Roosevelt  had  garbled  his  speeches,  had  not  given  him  "a  square 
deal,"  and  had  disregarded  the  promise  not  to  accept  another 
nomination.  Roosevelt  charged  the  President  with  violating  con 
fidential  correspondence,  with  intentional  misrepresentation,  and 


achieving  our  purpose,  but,  of  course,  achieve  the  purpose  we  must. 
What  we  want  to  do  is  to  remove  from  the  bench  men  who  are  unfit, 
and  not  wait  until  they  can  be  proved  guilty  of  criminal  acts. 

On  March  17,  1912,  I  replied: 

MY  DEAR  MR.  ROOSEVELT: 

I  don't  believe  we  look  on  the  recall  quite  alike.  While  I  think 
there  is  another  way  to  secure  the  removal  of  unfit  judges  and  of 
course  agree  with  you  that  that  way  should  be  adopted,  yet  if  their 
removal  cannot  be  secured  in  that  manner,  I  think  it  would  be  far 
better  to  continue  to  submit  to  present  evils  rather  than  adopt  a  method 
which  would  tend  to  make  a  coward,  a  trimmer,  and  a  time-server  of 
every  judge.  Unfit  judges  are  a  serious  abuse,  but  we  would  hardly 
reform  such  an  abuse  by  assassination,  and  I  doubt  whether  the  fear 
of  assassination  would  degrade  the  judiciary  any  more  surely  than 
the  consciousness  that  they  must  depend  for  their  continuance  in  office 
upon  pleasing  what  may  be  the  temporary  whim  of  the  people.  The 
terrible  example  of  the  French  Revolutionary  tribunals,  aptly  cited 
in  the  Outlook,  should  warn  us  against  such  a  course. 


PROGRESSIVE  CONVENTION  AND  CAMPAIGN       161 

with  a  responsibility  for  the  alliance  between  crooked  politics  and 
crooked  business;  and  he  reminded  the  President:  "It  is  a  bad 
trait  to  bite  the  hand  that  feeds  you." 

It  remained  to  be  decided  by  the  Republican  National  Con 
vention  at  Chicago  whether  the  voters  of  the  party  or  its  ma 
chine  leaders  and  manipulators  should  nominate  the  President. 
There  were  254  contested  seats.  The  members  of  the  National 
Committee,  selected  four  years  before  and  composed  largely  of 
reactionary  politicians,  some  of  whom  had  been  discredited  in 
their  own  States,  now  seated  235  Taft  delegates.  This  gave  Taft 
a  majority  on  the  preliminary  roll  call.  The  delegates  thus  seated 
voted  in  favour  of  each  other's  credentials,  and  Taft  was  nomi 
nated.4 


THE  PROGRESSIVE  CONVENTION  AND   CAMPAIGN 

What  would  the  Progressives  do?  Should  they  permit  a  con 
vention  controlled  by  fraud  thus  to  deliver  the  party  into  the 
hands  of  its  reactionary  elements  by  the  nomination  of  a  candi 
date  who  was  not  the  choice  of  the  vast  majority  of  its  members? 
Ought  they  thus  to  perpetuate  misrule?  They  determined  to  or 
ganise  a  party  of  their  own.  Mr.  Roosevelt  was  under  no  illusions 
as  to  the  probable  outcome  of  this  course.  He  wrote  me  on 
July  ist  that  he  felt  the  Democrats  would  probably  win  if  a 
progressive  man  should  be  nominated,  adding,  "But  of  course  there 
is  no  use  of  my  getting  into  a  fight  in  a  half-hearted  fashion, 
and  I  could  not  expect  Republicans  to  follow  me  out  if  they  were 
merely  to  endorse  the  Democratic  Convention.  So  I  hoisted  the 
flag  and  will  win  or  fall  under  it." 

Progressive  conventions  were  held  in  the  various  States  and 
districts,  and  delegates  were  sent  to  a  national  convention,  which 
met  on  August  5th  in  Chicago.  I  was  one  of  the  delegates  from 
my  own  district  and  was  placed  on  the  committee  on  resolutions 

4  The  fact  that  the  party  was  misrepresented  at  this  convention  was 
clearly  shown  afterwards  by  the  result  at  the  polls,  when  Taft  carried 
only  two  States  in  the  electoral  college,  casting  eight  votes,  while 
Roosevelt  had  88  electoral  votes  and  a  majority  over  Taft  of  more 
than  600,000  at  the  polls. 


1 62  THE  PROGRESSIVE  MOVEMENT 

to  prepare  the  platform.  Roosevelt,  as  the  guest  of  the  conven 
tion,  delivered  what  he  called  "A  Confession  of  Faith."  The 
convention  was  filled  with  a  kind  of  religious  enthusiasm  which 
reached  its  climax  when  he  concluded. 

The  committee  on  resolutions  had  plenty  to  do  on  account 
of  the  great  length  of  the  platform  and  the  vast  number  of 
questions  considered.  The  original  draft  when  read  to  us  took 
more  than  an  hour  in  delivery.  I  protested  vigorously,  and  in  our 
efforts  to  shorten  and  modify  it  we  spent  two  whole  nights,  besides 
much  of  the  intervening  day.  We  got  it  down  to  less  than  half 
of  its  original  dimensions,  but  it  was  still  far  too  long. 

In  spite  of  hard  work  we  had  a  good  time  on  that  committee. 
Professor  William  Draper  Lewis,  of  the  University  of  Pennsyl 
vania,  was  chairman  and  controlled  our  discussions  with  great 
skill.  William  Allen  White,  Chester  Rowell,  Gifford  Pinchot  and 
other  enthusiastic  souls  made  things  as  lively  as  possible  and  the 
final  product  was  one  of  the  most  notable  platforms  ever  adopted 
by  a  political  convention.5 

It  is  astonishing,  now  that  the  Progressive  Party  is  gone,  to  see 
how  many  of  the  things  it  advocated  have  been  actually  written 
into  the  laws  either  of  the  Federal  Government  or  of  various 
States. 

Again  I  took  an  active  part  in  the  campaign.  The  strongest 
attack  made  against  Mr.  Roosevelt  was  upon  the  ground  that  he 
was  a  candidate  for  a  "third  term."  Mr.  Taft  had  warned 
the  people  against  the  man  who  intended  to  hold  office  for 

5  It  advocated  direct  primaries  and  the  election  by  the  people  of 
United  States  Senators;  it  recommended  the  States  to  adopt  the  short 
ballot  and  the  initiative,  referendum  and  recall.  It  demanded  equal 
suffrage  for  women ;  civil-service  reform ;  the  limitation  and  publi 
cation  of  campaign  funds  both  before  and  after  elections ;  .registration 
of  lobbyists ;  publicity  of  committee  hearings ;  reform  in  legal  proce 
dure  ;  legislation  regarding  industrial  accidents,  child  labour,  wage 
standards,  women's  labour,  etc.  It  also  called  for  agricultural  credits 
and  education;  a  permanent  Federal  Commission  for  interstate  corpo 
rations  ;  conservation  of  natural  resources ;  a  tariff  which  should 
equalise  competition  and  with  immediate  downward  revision  of  exces 
sive  schedules ;  a  non-partisan  scientific  tariff  commission ;  international 
arbitration  and  a  national  inheritance  and  income  tax. 


PROGRESSIVE  CONVENTION  AND  CAMPAIGN       163 

life,  and  the  Democratic  platform  had  favoured  a  single  term 
and  a  constitutional  amendment  making  a  President  ineligible 
for  re-election.  I  considered  this  objection  in  my  speeches  and 
reminded  my  hearers  that  the  question  had  been  carefully  weighed 
by  the  convention  in  Philadelphia  when  the  Federal  Constitu 
tion  was  adopted.6  That  convention  finally  held  that  there 
ought  to  be  no  limit  as  to  the  number  of  terms  for  which  a 
candidate  should  be  eligible.  The  reason  Washington  had  de 
clined  a  second  re-election  was  not  because  it  would  have  been 
injurious  to  the  public,  but  because  he  was  personally  weary  of 
continuous  service  and  believed  he  was  entitled  to  seek  the  repose 
of  Mt.  Vernon. 

It  was  further  objected  that  since  Roosevelt  had  said,  when  he 
was  last  elected  in  1904,  that  he  would  not  accept  another  term, 
he  should  therefore  not  accept  it  now,  although  he  had  been  out 
of  office  four  years.  The  thing  he  then  had  in  mind  was  the 
question  of  successive  terms,  with  the  danger  in  the  control  of 
patronage  which  this  might  involve.  But  even  if  it  had  applied 
for  all  time,  he  had  no  right  to  bind  himself  to  abstain  from 
future  service  by  such  a  declaration.  When  Washington  laid  down 
his  command  of  the  army  at  the  end  of  the  Revolution  he  stated 
in  his  circular  letter  to  the  Governors,  his  "determination  of  not 
taking  any  share  in  public  business  thereafter,"  but  duty  called 
him  to  the  executive  chair  and  he  obeyed.  Every  criticism  of 
Roosevelt  for  becoming  a  candidate  on  this  ground  would  apply 
also  to  Washington. 

But  neither  the  excellence  of  the  Progressive  platform  nor  of 
the  candidate  could  offset  the  fact  that  the  Democrats  were 
united  while  their  opponents  were  hopelessly  divided.  Woodrow 
Wilson  was  elected  President  by  an  enormous  plurality,  though 
not  by  a  majority  of  all  the  votes. 

6  Jefferson  thought  that  the  holding  of  the  Presidential  office  should 
be  limited  to  a  single  term;  Washington  thought  otherwise,  and  in  a 
letter  to  Lafayette  on  April  28,  1788,  said,  "I  confess  I  differ  widely 
myself  from  Mr.  Jefferson  and  you  as  to  the  necessity  or  expediency 
of  rotation  in  that  office.  ...  I  can  see  no  propriety  in  precluding 
ourselves  from  the  services  of  any  man  who,  in  some  great  emergency, 
shall  be  deemed  universally  most  capable  of  serving  the  public." 


164  THE  PROGRESSIVE  MOVEMENT 


THE   FIRST   WILSON   ADMINISTRATION 

President  Wilson  called  Congress  to  convene  in  special  session 
on  April  7,  1913,  and  announced  as  the  leading  features  of  his 
policies:  the  revision  of  the  tariff,  a  new  banking  and  currency 
system,  and  additional  anti-trust  legislation.  These  things  were 
accomplished  gradually,  though  as  to  anti-trust  legislation  the 
remedy  was  quite  incomplete,  while  many  things  promised  in  the 
Democratic  platform  were  ignored  or  repudiated.  For  instance, 
the  platform  had  declared  that  the  Government  had  no  right  nor 
power  to  impose  duties,  except  for  revenue;  yet  by  the  new  tariff 
law  there  were  special  industries  which  were  protected.  The 
platform  had  favoured  a  single  presidential  term  and  had  urged  a 
constitutional  amendment  making  the  President  ineligible  for 
re-election  and  had  pledged  the  candidate  to  this  principle;  but 
no  such  amendment  was  proposed  by  Congress,  and  the  candidate 
thus  pledged  afterwards  became  a  candidate  for  re-election.  The 
party  had  denounced  the  waste  of  money  under  the  Republican 
administration  and  had  spent  much  more  itself;  it  had  promised 
legislation  to  prevent  gambling  in  wheat  and  had  failed  to  enact  it; 
it  had  declared  that  "the  law  pertaining  to  the  civil  service  should 
be  honestly  and  rigidly  enforced,  to  the  end  that  merit  and  ability 
should  be  the  standard  of  appointment  and  promotion  rather 
than  service  rendered  to  a  political  party";  yet  in  spite  of  this 
assurance  one  law  after  another  was  passed  creating  new  offices, 
which  were  all  excepted  from  the  civil  service  examinations,  and 
the  existing  places  of  deputy  revenue  collectors  and  marshals  were 
removed  from  the  competitive  system.  In  each  case  the  Presi 
dent  signed  the  bills.  Moreover,  he  permitted  the  fourth-class 
postmasterships  and  the  rural  free  delivery  service  to  be  looted 
by  politicians  and  to  become  the  spoils  of  Congressmen,7  while 
important  ambassadorships  were  given  to  men  without  diplomatic 
experience,  who  had  been  large  contributors  to  Democratic  cam 
paign  funds.  These  shortcomings  convinced  many  who  had  been 
Progressives  that  the  Democratic  Party  with  Mr.  Wilson  at  its 

7  See  "Fighting  the  Spoilsmen,"  pp.  233  to  242. 


THE  FIRST  WILSON  ADMINISTRATION          165 

head  ought  not  to  be  supported  if  there  were  any  reasonable  alter 
native. 

The  foreign  policy  of  the  administration  was  deplorable.  In 
the  platform  it  was  said  that  "every  American  citizen  in  any 
foreign  country  must  be  given  the  full  protection  of  the  Govern 
ment  both  for  himself  and  for  his  property,"  yet  when  in  Mex 
ico  hundreds  of  Americans  were  killed  and  women  were  ravished, 
the  Government  withheld  this  protection  for  years  until  a  great 
body  of  our  citizens  residing  in  that  country  were  compelled  to 
flee,  while  their  property  was  confiscated  or  destroyed. 

Then  in  August,  1914,  the  great  war  broke  out,  and  Belgium 
and  France  were  invaded.  Yet  the  President  did  nothing  to  pre 
pare  the  country  for  the  emergency  nor  to  awaken  the  people 
to  its  perils.  On  the  contrary,  although  our  military  and  naval 
officers  had  warned  him  of  the  danger,  although  the  Chief  of 
Staff  had  urged  an  increase  in  the  army  from  93,000  to  500,000 
men,  although  Roosevelt,  Congressman  Gardner,  and  other  patriotic 
men  had  upbraided  Congress  for  its  demented  policy  in  neglecting 
to  prepare,  the  President  not  only  failed  to  urge  the  need  of  a 
greater  armament,  but  actually  discouraged  its  formation.  In 
his  message  to  Congress  of  December  8  he  said: 

"We  have  never  had,  and  while  we  retain  our  present  principles  and 
ideals  we  never  shall  have,  a  large  standing  army  .  .  .  and  especially, 
when  half  the  world  is  on  fire,  we  shall  be  careful  to  make  our  moral 
insurance  against  the  spread  of  the  conflagration  very  definite  and 
certain  and  adequate  indeed." 

He  would  give  the  rudiments  of  drill  to  volunteers  and  encourage 
National  Guards,  but,  he  added,  "More  than  this  carries  with  it 
a  reversal  of  the  whole  history  and  character  of  our  polity.  .  .  . 
We  shall  not  alter  our  attitude  toward  the  subject  because  some 
among  us  are  nervous  and  excited." 

After  a  year  and  a  half  had  elapsed  and  popular  opinion  all 
over  the  country,  more  alert  than  the  President,  had  come  to 
demand  adequate  preparation,  Mr.  Wilson  took  the  alarm  and 
in  his  speech  at  Chicago  he  announced  that  peace  and  the  honour 
of  the  country  might  become  incompatible;  at  St.  Louis  he 
demanded  that  America  should  have  "incomparably  the  largest 
navy  in  the  world/" 


i66  THE  PROGRESSIVE  MOVEMENT 

As  to  the  army,  the  Secretary  of  War,  Mr.  Garrison,  proposed 
a  plan  which  Mr.  Wilson  approved,  but  when  he  met  with  oppo 
sition  in  Congress,  the  President  relinquished  it  and  Garrison 
resigned.  The  act  which  passed,  providing  for  a  State  militia 
aided  by  a  Federal  subsidy,  was  utterly  inadequate  and  greatly 
resembled  "pork  barrel"  legislation.  It  seemed  to  many  that 
the  party  and  the  President  that  adopted  this  as  a  measure  of 
defence  ought  not  to  be  continued  in  power. 

Meanwhile  the  President  gave  warnings  to  the  German  Govern 
ment,  but  failed  to  make  them  good.  The  Lusitania  was  de 
stroyed  and  more  than  one  hundred  Americans  were  drowned, 
yet  four  days  afterwards,  while  our  people  were  stirred  to  the 
depths  by  this  outrage  the  Presided  in  a  speech  at  Philadelphia 
declared: 

"The  example  of  America  must  be  the  example,  not  merely  of  peace, 
because  it  will  not  fight,  but  of  peace  because  peace  is  the  healing  and 
elevating  influence  of  the  world  and  strife  is  not.  There  is  such  a  thing 
as  a  man  being  too  proud  to  fight;  there  is  such  a  thing  as  a  nation 
being  so  right  that  it  does  not  need  to  convince  others  by  force  that 
it  is  right." 

Germany  justified  the  sinking  of  the  Lusitania,  and  the  admin 
istration  replied  that  any  repetition  of  such  an  act  must  be 
regarded  by  our  Government  as  "deliberately  unfriendly."  On 
March  24,  1916,  the  Sussex  was  sunk  in  the  English  Channel 
and  more  American  citizens  were  killed.  Our  Government  now 
declared  that  unless  Germany  abandoned  her  methods  of  sub 
marine  warfare  against  passenger  and  freight  vessels,  the  United 
States  would  sever  diplomatic  relations.  Germany  replied  that 
orders  had  been  issued  that  merchant  vessels  should  not  be  sunk 
without  warning  and  without  saving  human  lives  unless  an  attempt 
were  made  to  escape  or  offer  resistance.  Germany  at  the  same 
time  insisted  that  the  United  States  should  make  certain  demands 
upon  Great  Britain  and  declared  that  if  these  were  not  com 
plied  with  Germany  "must  demand  complete  liberty  of  decision." 
Our  Government  answered  that  our  rights  must  not  be  contingent 
upon  the  conduct  of  any  other  nation.  To  this  Germany  made 
no  reply,  and  it  was  evident  that  the  destruction  of  merchant 
vessels  might  be  resumed  at  any  time.  Such  was  the  unsatisfac- 


THE  CAMPAIGN  OF  igi6  167 

tory  condition  of  our  foreign  relations  when  the  Presidential  cam 
paign  of  1916  began. 


THE   CAMPAIGN   OF    1916 

The  Republican  and  Progressive  National  conventions  were 
both  held  in  Chicago  on  June  yth,  the  former  in  the  Coliseum, 
and  the  latter  in  the  Auditorium.  Among  the  Progressives  no 
candidate  was  spoken  of  but  Roosevelt.  Among  the  Republicans 
there  were  a  number  of  "favourite  sons,"  but  it  was  clear  to 
many  of  us  in  the  Progressive  Convention  that  Mr.  Justice 
Hughes,  of  the  United  States  Supreme  Court,  was  their  most 
available  man.  He  had,  however,  declared  that  he  was  totally 
opposed  to  the  use  of  his  name,  and  he  had  made  no  announce 
ment  of  his  political  belief.  Some  weeks  before  the  convention  I 
had  written  to  Mr.  Perkins,  the  chairman  of  the  Progressive 
National  Committee,  as  follows: 

DEAR  SIR: 

I  have  been  thinking  much  of  what  should  be  the  course  of  our 
Progressive  Convention  at  Chicago.  It  seems  to  be  quite  probable 
that  Hughes  may  be  the  nominee  of  the  Republican  Convention.  He 
will  hardly  make  a  declaration  of  his  principles  before  the  convention 
is  held  or  before  he  is  nominated.  To  nominate  a  man  without  know 
ing  authoritatively  what  he  stands  for  would,  on  the  face  of  it,  be 
monstrous.  But  it  is  likely  that  if  he  be  nominated  he  will  express 
his  views  at  once.  .  .  .  But  if  our  convention  should  wait  until  Justice 
Hughes  gives  this  expression,  and  it  should  be  favourable  to  the  things 
we  stand  for,  it  might  weaken  us  to  oppose  him  with  knowledge  of 
this  fact. 

It  would  therefore  seem  to  me  that  our  convention  ought  to  act 
instantly,  if  it  should  learn  of  Hughes'  nomination,  and,  with  a 
declaration  of  the  absurdity  of  nominating  a  candidate  whose  views 
were  unknown,  should  immediately  nominate  Roosevelt  by  acclama 
tion,  and  leave  with  him  the  determination  of  the  question  whether, 
after  further  knowledge  of  Justice  Hughes'  intentions,  he  should  sup 
port  him  or  run  himself  upon  the  Progressive  ticket.  ...  I  think  Mr. 
Roosevelt  would  be  better  qualified,  later  on,  to  do  what  circumstances 
demand  than  the  Progressive  Convention  would  be  to  take  final  action. 

It  was  a  good  deal  in  this  way  that  matters  developed  in  the 
convention. 


i68  THE  PROGRESSIVE  MOVEMENT 

The  intense  desire  of  that  convention  was  to  secure  the  nomi 
nation  of  Roosevelt  by  both  Progressives  and  Republicans.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  Republicans  were  determined  that  he  should 
not  be  the  candidate.  Many  of  them  would  have  preferred  Wil 
son.  Their  object  was  to  find  a  way  to  reject  Roosevelt  and 
yet  offer  a  nominee  who  would  attract  the  Progressive  vote.  In 
the  Progressive  Convention  all  was  enthusiasm ;  in  the  Republican 
Convention,  where  the  delegates  had  been  "hand  picked"  from 
the  regulars  in  the  party,  there  was  little  enthusiasm  but  a  great 
deal  of  calculation.  Most  of  the  Progressives  wanted  to  nomi 
nate  Roosevelt,  and  then  adjourn  and  let  the  Republicans  accept 
their  candidate  or  face  defeat,  but  the  managers  desired  the  union 
of  the  two  parties  under  Roosevelt  if  possible;  but  if  not,  then 
under  some  one  whom  the  Progressives  could  accept.  Conferences 
were  held  through  a  joint  committee,  but  without  result.  Bal 
loting  began  in  the  Republican  Convention,  and  on  Saturday 
morning  it  became  certain  that  Hughes  would  be  nominated. 
About  thirty  seconds  before  this  was  done,  Roosevelt  was  nomi 
nated  by  acclamation  by  the  Progressives. 

But  now  Roosevelt  sent  word  that  if  an  immediate  decision  was 
desired,  he  would  decline.  He  suggested  that  the  decision  should 
be  placed  in  the  hands  of  the  Progressive  National  Committee, 
and  that  if  Mr.  Hughes  made  a  satisfactory  declaration  they 
should  treat  the  refusal  as  definite.  If  not  so  satisfied,  the  com 
mittee  could  then  determine  what  action  would  be  appropriate. 
This  telegram  fell  like  a  death  blow  upon  the  convention,  and 
there  was  widespread  indignation.  Many  were  ready  to  denounce 
the  man  whose  praises  they  had  just  been  singing. 

Justice  Hughes'  statement  of  principles  was  satisfactory,  and 
Roosevelt  wrote  to  the  Progressive  National  Committee  definitely 
declining  the  nomination  and  giving  his  reasons  for  supporting 
Hughes.8 

8  The  majority  of  the  committee  took  a  course  similar  to  that  of  Mr. 
Roosevelt,  but  there  was  serious  dissent.  The  Indiana  State  Committee 
repudiated  his  action.  I  wrote  to  him,  telling  him  what  they  had  done 
and  in  his  answer,  dated  July  5th  he  said: 

"For  nearly  two  years  I  have  been  attacking  Wilson  as  no  Republi 
can  has  attacked  him,  and  I  attacked  him  for  a  year  when  most  of 


THE  CAMPAIGN  OF  1916  169 

My  health  was  such  that  I  could  not  take  an  active  part  in  the 
campaign,  but  I  contributed  to  its  literature.  Mr.  Hughes'  per 
sonal  canvass  was  unimpressive,  and  he  was  defeated  by  a  very 
close  vote. 

President  Wilson  had  now  reversed  his  policy  in  regard  to  mak 
ing  adequate  preparation  for  national  defence.  At  the  same  time 
his  election  was  largely  due  to  the  support  of  the  pacifists,  who 
reminded  us  all  through  the  campaign  that  he  had  "kept  us  out 
of  war."  In  one  respect  his  election  was  not  so  serious  a  misfor 
tune  as  it  seemed  at  the  time,  because  the  anti-war  element  was 
greatest  in  the  Democratic  Party  and  could  best  be  controlled 
by  a  Democratic  President  who  had  sympathised  with  it.  At  all 
events,  when  the  war  came  on,  the  country  was  successful  in  unit 
ing  all  parties  in  support  of  the  Government. 

the  Republicans,  including  Mr.  Taft,  were  inclined  to  support  him. 
The  Progressives  who  then  supported  me  and  who  insisted  .upon  my 
nomination  must  have  done  so,  if  they  were  intelligent  and  sincere, 
because  I  represented  extreme  hostility  to  Wilson.  It  is  therefore  now 
utterly  incomprehensible  how  these  men  can  support  Wilson." 

The  men  who  controlled  the  Indiana  organisation,  however,  did  not 
represent  the  great  mass  of  the  Progressives  in  the  State,  and  Hughes 
carried  Indiana  by  a  large  majority. 


CHAPTER  X 

THE  TRUSTS 

No  might  of  arms  can  work  thine  overthrow, 

No  foreign  conquest  nor  domestic  strife ; 
Yet  though  thy  shield  be  stout  to  foil  the  foe 

Poison  may  lurk  within  to  waste  thy  life. 
Thine  affluence  offers  in  its  golden  bowl 

A  deadlier  bane  than  penury's  bitterest  gall. 
Let  not  the  thirst  for  riches  taint  thy  soul 

To  spread  its  fell  corruption  over  all. 

— Ad  Rempublicam. 
See  infra,  pp.  177,  178. 

THE   CHICAGO    CONFERENCES 

As  far  back  as  the  administration  of  President  McKinley  the 
problem  of  the  trusts  began  to  crystallise  into  three  sets  of 
opinions:  the  first  in  favour  of  letting  them  alone,  the  second  of 
exterminating  them,  and  the  third  of  controlling  and  regulating 
them.  I  believed  the  last  to  be  the  best  plan.  A  conference  of 
economists  and  publicists  was  called  by  the  Civic  Federation  to 
meet  at  Chicago,  September  13,  1899.  It  lasted  four  days.  Every 
conceivable  point  of  view  was  represented.  I  had  been  asked  to 
prepare  an  address  to  be  delivered  on  the  afternoon  of  the  i5th, 
but  it  was  crowded  out,  and  I  was  put  on  the  programme  for 
the  first  address  in  the  evening.  Just  as  I  was  stepping  upon 
the  stage  a  friend  met  me. 

"I  congratulate  you  on  that  speech,"  he  said. 

"What  speech?"  I  asked. 

"The  one  you  delivered  here  this  afternoon,"  he  replied. 

"But  I  made  no  speech  this  afternoon,"  I  rejoined. 

"Here  it  is,"  he  answered,  and  showed  me  in  an  evening  paper 
more  than  two  columns  of  what  I  was  alleged  to  have  said.  The 
reporter  had  asked  me  for  an  advance  copy  and  the  city  editor, 
not  knowing  of  the  change  in  the  programme,  had  published  nearly 

170 


THE  CHICAGO  CONFERENCES  171 

in  full  the  things  I  was  just  going  to  say!  I  imagined  tlnat  many 
in  that  audience  must  have  seen  it  and  to  repeat  to  them  the 
things  they  had  just  read — that  was  unthinkable.  What  was  to 
be  done?  Luckily  I  had  other  material  on  hand,  nearly  enough 
for  a  second  speech,  and  by  good  fortune  there  was  just  a  little 
of  my  copy  which  the  paper  had  not  used.  So  by  piecing  the 
two  together  I  could  still  make  a  presentable  address.  I  had 
only  a  few  moments  to  arrange  my  material,  but  it  was  enough. 

The  audience  was  an  inspiring  one.  W.  Bourke  Cockran  and 
Wm.  Jennings  Bryan  had  both  been  advertised  to  speak,  so  the 
hall  was  packed  to  the  doors.  I  was  able  to  go  on  swimmingly 
until  Mr.  Cockran  entered  amid  applause  which  suspended  my 
observations.  I  began  again,  but  it  was  not  long  till  Mr.  Bryan 
appeared,  at  which  there  was  a  still  greater  demonstration.  After 
it  ended  I  told  the  audience  that  I  knew  quite  well  they  had 
come  to  hear  others  and  that  I  would  bring  my  remarks  to  a 
close.  A  voice  from  the  middle  of  the  orchestra  cried  "Good!" 
This  seemed  pointed  enough,  though  not  remarkably  polite,  and 
in  a  minute  more  I  was  done. 

The  audience,  however,  as  I  concluded,  showed  me  a  good  deal 
of  cordiality. 

Next  day  a  gentleman  came  up  to  the  place  where  I  was  sitting 
and  in  a  rather  sheepish  manner  said: 

"Mr.  Foulke,  I  want  to  apologise." 

I  asked  him  why. 

"I  am  the  man,"  he  said,  "who  cried  'good'  during  your  speech 
last  night.  I  meant  that  what  you  had  been  saying  was  good — 
not  that  it  was  good  you  were  going  to  stop.  But  neither  you  nor 
anybody  else  seemed  to  understand  it  that  way." 

I  thanked  him  for  his  explanation,  but  I  realised  then  as  never 
before  the  importance  of  putting  punctuation  in  the  right  place. 

Mr.  Cockran  made  an  elaborate  and  brilliant  address,  urging 
that  the  trusts  should  be  deprived  of  all  special  favours  and 
that  publicity  should  be  required,  but  insisting  that  otherwise 
they  might  safely  be  allowed  to  conduct  their  operations. 

On  the  following  morning  Mr.  Bryan  spoke.  A  monopoly  in 
private  hands,  he  said,  was  indefensible.  The  removal  of  the 
tariff  or  of  railroad  discriminations  would  not  obliterate  the 


172  THE  TRUSTS 

trusts.  The  remedy  he  proposed  was  that  Congress  should  pass 
a  law  providing  that  no  corporation  organised  in  any  State  should 
do  business  outside  that  State  until  it  received  a  license 
granted  only  on  condition  that  the  corporation  should  show:  first, 
that  there  was  no  water  in  its  stock;  second,  that  publicity  in  its 
business  was  provided  for;  third,  that  it  had  not  maintained 
and  was  not  attempting  to  secure  a  monopoly.  If  any  of  these 
conditions  were  violated  the  license  should  be  revoked. 

In  the  afternoon  there  was  an  open  debate,  and  I  seized  the 
occasion  to  criticise  Mr.  Bryan's  plan,  insisting  that  even  if 
a  license  should  be  refused  and  corporations  should  be 
forbidden  to  do  business  outside  the  State  where  they  were  or 
ganised,  this  would  not  annihilate  the  trusts.  They  might  sell 
their  goods  to  a  middleman,  who,  if  he  should  become  the  owner 
of  property  lawfully  manufactured  in  his  own  State,  could  not, 
under  our  Federal  Constitution,  be  excluded  from  selling  it  in 
other  States.  The  States  had  been  passing  laws  for  the  abolition 
of  trusts  for  more  than  ten  years,  yet  all  these,  as  well  as  the 
Federal  act,  had  been  found  ineffective.  The  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  States  in  the  Knight  case — the  case  of  the  Sugar 
Trust — had  decided  that  the  Sherman  Anti-Trust  Law  applied 
only  to  the  agencies  controlling  transportation,  and  had  indi 
cated  that  the  Constitution  had  given  Congress  no  power  over 
manufacturing  trusts,  and  that  the  Sherman  Act  had  not  pro 
hibited  them.  To  do  this,  therefore,  an  amendment  to  the  Con 
stitution  would  be  required.  This  would  have  to  be  adopted  by 
two-thirds  of  both  houses  of  Congress  and  ratified  by  three-fourths 
of  all  the  States.  It  would  be  very  hard  to  secure  such  an  amend 
ment.  .  .  . 

I  thus  continued: 


It  seems  to  me  that  if  all  corporations  could  be  destroyed  (which 
I  think  is  impossible)  we  could  not  even  then  abolish  the  trusts.  If 
the  Standard  Oil  Company  were  dissolved,  the  men  who  control  it 
might  organise  a  partnership  to  carry  on  the  same  business  in  the 
same  way.  Or  if  that  would  involve  too  great  a  risk,  what  is  there 
to  prevent  the  stockholders  of  the  great  companies  from  loaning  the 
value  of  their  stock  to  some  manager,  agreeing  to  receive  in  lieu  of 
interest  a  proportionate  part  of  the  profits  of  the  joint  adventure? 


THE  CHICAGO  CONFERENCES  173 

If  you  abolish  one  form  of  combination,  another  will  take  its  place. 
When  you  propose  to  annihilate  trusts  you  are  proposing  to  destroy 
the  tendency  of  men  to  unite,  and  it  is  just  as  impossible  to  destroy 
that  as  it  is  to  annihilate  the  law  of  gravitation. 

But  although  we  cannot  annihilate  the  trusts,  we  may  regulate  and 
restrain  their  injurious  influences.  You  cannot  stop  the  Mississippi 
by  a  dam,  but  you  may  conduct  it  into  safer  and  more  convenient 
channels. 

To  this  Mr.  Bryan  replied: 

I  do  not  agree  with  the  gentleman  that  you  cannot  annihilate  a 
monopoly.  I  believe  it  is  possible  to  do  so.  ... 

The  Supreme  Court  in  deciding  the  Knight  case  did  not  say  that  a 
broader  law  than  the  present  one  would  be  unconstitutional. 

It  is  true  there  are  things  in  the  decision  which  suggest  that,  but 
until  that  question  is  presented  to  the  Court,  you  cannot  say  that  the 
Court  has  passed  upon  it.  It  is  also  true  that  Justice  Harlan  in  his 
dissenting  opinion,  assumed  that  a  broader  law  would  be  held  uncon 
stitutional,  but  no  one  has  a  right  to  say  that  if  such  a  law  ,as  I  sug 
gest  were  passed  and  reviewed  by  the  Supreme  Court,  it  would  be 
held  unconstitutional. 

But  suppose  the  law  is  passed  and  held  unconstitutional ;  then  we  can 
amend  the  Constitution. 

The  gentleman  suggests  that  it  is  a  difficult  thing  to  get  two-thirds 
of  both  houses  and  three-fourths  of  the  States  to  favour  such  an 
amendment.  That  is  true;  it  is  a  difficult  thing,  but  if  the  people  want 
to  destroy  the  trusts  they  can  control  two-thirds  of  both  houses  and 
three-fourths  of  the  States. 

It  had  been  intended  that  resolutions  should  be  passed  express 
ing  the  sense  of  the  Conference,  and  Mr.  Bryan  insisted  upon  this, 
but  the  differences  were  so  pronounced  that  it  could  not  be  done. 
The  only  remedy  upon  which  all  seemed  united  was  greater  pub 
licity  for  business  transactions. 

But  the  resolutions  which  Mr.  Bryan  failed  to  secure  from 
the  Conference  he  succeeded  in  securing  from  the  Democratic 
National  Convention  in  the  following  year,  and  his  proposal  be 
came  one  of  the  issues  of  the  campaign. 

He  was  overwhelmingly  defeated  by  McKinley,  and  his  scheme 
for  the  extermination  of  the  trusts  was  indefinitely  postponed  in 
favour  of  the  more  reasonable  plan  of  endeavouring  to  regulate 
and  control  their  harmful  activities.  McKinley's  early  death  and 


174  THE  TRUSTS 

the  succession  of  Roosevelt  were  followed  by  active  measures  look 
ing  toward  this  regulation.  The  Department  of  Commerce  and 
the  Bureau  of  Corporations  were  established,  and  investigations 
were  made  which  showed  the  oppressive  methods  adopted  by  the 
Standard  Oil  Company  and  similar  organisations.  The  bill  for 
bidding  rebates  was  enacted  as  well  as  the  meat  inspection  bill, 
while  the  rate  bill  and  other  regulative  and  restrictive  measures 
were  set  on  foot. 

In  October,  1907,  another  conference  on  the  subject  of  the 
trusts  was  held  in  Chicago;  I  was  again  invited  to  participate 
and  suggested  the  following  plan  for  Government  regulation  of 
industrial  monopolies: 

Whenever  a  corporation  is  accused  of  exercising  monopolistic  powers 
and  injuriously  controlling  rates,  driving  competitors  out  of  the  mar 
ket  by  arbitrary  reductions,  preferring  one  set  of  customers  to  another, 
or  one  section  of  the  community  to  another,  and  so  far  suppressing 
competition  that  it  can  maintain  its  unjust  rates  and  discriminations; 
acting,  in  other  words,  oppressively  either  to  rivals  or  to  the  public, 
provision  should  be  made  for  a  suit  to  be  brought  before  an  appro 
priate  tribunal.  Let  the  object  of  that  suit  be,  not  to  dissolve  the  cor 
poration,  which  is  useless,  or  to  confiscate  its  property,  which  is 
ruinous,  but  to  declare  it  a  monopoly  and  to  subject  it  for  that  reason 
to  the  same  Governmental  control  as  to  rates,  prices,  purchases,  sales, 
reports  and  general  conduct  as  railways  and  other  public-service  cor 
porations. 


TRUSTS    IN    THE    CAMPAIGN   OF    1 908 

In  the  campaign  of  1908  with  Taft  on  one  side  and  Bryan  on 
the  other,  the  trust  question  again  came  to  the  front.  Mr.  Bryan 
had  by  this  time  developed  his  original  license  system  for  exter 
minating  the  trusts  into  something  far  more  elaborate  and  impos 
sible.  The  Democratic  platform  proposed  that  whenever  a  corpo 
ration  controlled  twenty-five  per  cent  of  the  product  in  any  line 
of  industry  it  should  be  required  to  take  out  a  Federal  license  to 
conduct  an  interstate  business,  and  that  this  license  should  pro 
hibit  it  from  controlling  more  than  fifty  per  cent  of  the  product. 
It  would  be  hard  to  conceive  of  a  crazier  plan  for  abolishing  the 
trusts.  A  special  census  of  the  particular  industry  would  be  re- 


PRACTICAL  REMEDIES  175 

quired,  entailing  enormous  labour  and  expense,  before  the  pre 
liminary  question  could  be  settled,  whether  the  corporation 
was  bound  to  take  out  a  license  at  all.  And  when  the  license 
was  procured,  what  was  accomplished?  The  corporation  was 
prohibited  from  controlling  more  than  half  of  any  product.  An 
other  census  would  have  to  be  taken  to  find  when  that  point  was 
reached.  The  licensed  corporations  were  to  oscillate  between 
twenty-five  and  fifty  per  cent.  But  suppose  the  second  census 
were  taken  and  it  were  proved  that  a  corporation  controlled  sixty 
per  cent,  what  then?  It  could  be  dissolved.  The  owners  and 
managers  would  then  create  new  organisations  with  their  wives, 
relatives,  friends  and  business  associates  in  charge  of  "competing" 
concerns  which  would  carry  on  business  and  oppress  the  public 
just  as  before.  But  all  this  could  already  be  done  under  the 
Sherman  Act!  Mr.  Bryan's  plan  was  the  most  elaborate  and  ex 
pensive  scheme  for  accomplishing  nothing  that  had  ever  found 
entrance  into  the  platform  of  a  great  political  party. 

It  was  natural  that  upon  such  an  issue  the  Democratic  candi 
date  should  be  overwhelmingly  defeated. 

Voluntary  Federal  incorporation  was  the  measure  advocated  by 
President  Taft.  It  struck  me  as  utterly  futile.  When  the  Presi 
dent  came  out  with  his  measure  filled  with  this  tempting  provender 
and  shook  it  under  the  noses  of  the  trusts,  would  they  begin  to 
eat  and  let  him  put  the  halter  around  their  necks?  Some  of  the 
younger  and  greener  ones  might  do  so,  but  the  old  grey  fellows 
would  kick  their  heels  in  the  air  and  trot  off  the  other  way. 
Nothing  but  a  good  strong  cowboy's  lasso  could  ever  haul  them 
in.  No  great  monopoly  that  really  needed  to  be  regulated  would 
voluntarily  incorporate.  Mr.  Taft's  remedy  for  the  abuses  of 
the  trusts  was  to  give  them  an  additional  privilege,  to  be  accepted 
or  rejected  at  their  option! 


PRACTICAL    REMEDIES 

But  while  we  had  been  thus  debating  and  theorising,  other  coun 
tries  had  been  acting.  Canada  had  provided  for  an  investigation 
which  should  determine  whether  a  given  "combine"  was  a  harmful 
monopoly,  and  Germany  had  shown  the  kind  of  governmental 


1 76  THE  TRUSTS 

regulation  to  be  applied  where  a  monopoly  actually  existed.1  If 
America  would  combine  the  essential  features  of  Canadian  and 
German  legislation  the  problem  would  be  solved. 

I  advocated  this  solution  of  the  trust  question  on  various  public 
occasions,  among  others  at  a  meeting  of  the  Civic  Federation  in 
New  York  on  January  12,  1911.  In  a  subsequent  issue  of  the 
Outlook  in  this  same  month  Theodore  Roosevelt  referred  with 
approval  to  this  method  of  controlling  the  trusts.  He  said:  "I 
think  that  the  powers  of  the  Bureau  of  Corporations  should  be  so 
extended  as  to  enable  it  to  apply  to  the  gigantic  business  combi 
nations  participating  in  the  commerce  between  the  States  the  same 
kind  of  Federal  regulation  which  is  now  applied  to  the  railways 
through  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission.  Mr.  William 
Dudley  Foulke  has  worked  out  this  idea  admirably  in  his  recent 
speech  to  the  National  Civic  Federation  and  has  shown  that  all 
that  is  necessary  for  us  to  do  is  to  combine  and  slightly  improve 
upon  what  has  already  been  done  in  Canada  and  Germany  in 
this  matter. 

"Where  competition  is  really  free,  competition  is  still  the  best 

1  In  Canada  by  "The  Combines'  Investigation  Act"  six  persons  might 
make  application  to  a  judge  for  an  investigation,  and  if  this  was 
ordered,  the  minister  of  labour  appointed  three  persons  to  conduct 
the  enquiry,  one  on  the  recommendation  of  the  applicants,  another  on 
the  recommendation  of  the  parties  accused,  and  a  third  on  the  recom 
mendation  of  the  two  members  so  chosen.  This  third  man  must  be 
a  judge.  Whenever  it  was  found  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  governor 
in  Council  that  a  combine  existed  to  promote  unduly  the  advantages 
of  the  manufacturers  or  dealers  at  the  expense  of  consumers  and  that 
this  was  facilitated  by  customs  duties,  he  might  direct  that  the  articles 
affected  be  admitted  duty  free.  Or  if  the  holder  of  a  patent  injured 
trade  and  unduly  lessened  production  or  enhanced  prices  the  minister 
of  justice  might  cause  the  patent  to  be  revoked.  If  a  person  reported 
as  guilty  continued  to  offend  he  was  liable  to  a  penalty  of  a  thousand 
dollars  for  each  day  after  ten  days  from  the  publication  of  the  decision. 

Where  a  monopoly  was  actually  established  Germany  applied  the 
remedy.  For  there  a  law  had  been  passed  regulating  the  production 
of  potash,  of  which  that  country  had  a  monopoly,  owned  and  operated 
by  fifty-four  companies  which  were  overproducing  and  depleting  the 
supply.  The  act  fixed  the  proportion  which  each  company  might  pro 
duce,  the  labour  conditions  and  the  maximum  prices  and  provided  a 
court  to  reapportion  this  production  every  two  years. 


PRACTICAL  REMEDIES  177 

fixer  of  prices  and  regulator  of  conduct;  but  where  competition 
is  in  reality  stifled,  and  one  great  concern  gets  the  power  to  fix 
prices  of  labour  and  commodities,  then  the  Government  should 
receive  the  power  to  exercise  administrative  control  over  the  con 
cern  and  should  exercise  that  power  just  as  freely  as  if  the  con 
cern  were  one  of  the  so-called  natural  monopolies  like  a  street 
railway  or  a  water  company.  .  .  .  The  proceeding  should  be,  in 
substance,  to  declare  any  corporation  an  injurious  monopoly,  and 
when  that  declaration  should  be  definitely  affirmed  by  the  proper 
body,  whatever  it  might  be,  to  subject  the  corporation  to  thorough 
going  governmental  control  as  to  rates,  prices  and  general  con 
duct." 

Some  two  months  later,  at  a  meeting  of  the  Western  Economic 
Society  at  Chicago  I  discussed  more  in  detail  the  kind  of  con 
trol  which  ought  to  be  exercised  by  an  interstate  trade  or  indus 
trial  commission  (as  the  successor  of  the  Bureau  of  Corporations) 
in  cases  where  the  monopoly  involved  had  been  shown  to  be  guilty 
of  an  injurious  restraint  of  trade. 

On  September  26,  1914,  an  act  was  passed  establishing  a  Fed 
eral  Trade  Commission  to  deal  with  associations  (except  banks 
and  common  carriers)  which  used  "unfair  methods  of  competition 
in  commerce,"  but  its  determinations  had  to  be  enforced  by  a 
Federal  Court  and  were  subject  to  an  appeal,  while  the  scope  of 
the  Anti-Trust  laws  was  not  greatly  extended.  Much  of  the 
work  of  the  commission  corresponded  to  that  of  a  master  in 
chancery  in  a  Federal  Court. 

The  measures  which  will  ultimately  be  needed  for  the  control 
of  injurious  monopolies  have  not  yet  been  taken.  It  is  realised 
that  Government  control  may  be  necessary  to  protect  the  public 
from  the  domination  of  organised  labour  as  well  as  from  the 
tyranny  of  concentrated  capital,  and  it  is  clear  that  if  the  great 
industries  of  the  country  are  to  remain  in  private  hands  such 
control  will  have  to  be  provided  by  law. 

I  have  always  thought  that  this  problem  of  the  trusts  was  a 
vital  one,  not  simply  because  these  combinations  of  capital 
brought  in  their  train  monopoly  and  injustice,  but  because  they 
were  part  of  a  general  tendency  toward  the  accumulation  of  vast 
wealth  in  the  hands  of  the  few.  This,  if  it  goes  on  unhindered, 


178  THE  TRUSTS 

is  bound  in  the  end  to  take  the  real  power  of  government  from 
the  body  of  the  people  and  give  it  to  a  favoured  class,  thus  creat 
ing  an  oligarchy  in  place  of  a  democracy.  I  had  been  deeply 
impressed  by  the  lesson  taught  in  the  history  of  the  decline  and 
fall  of  many  free  communities  and  nations  from  this  cause,  and 
I  embodied  the  most  striking  examples  in  ancient  as  in  later  times 
in  my  address  to  the  Civic  Federation,  setting  forth  the  peril  which 
these  illustrations  foreshadowed.  Some  will  say  that  the  analogies 
are  remote  and  the  danger  exaggerated.  Others  will  believe  that 
a  more  immediate  danger  is  threatened  by  the  vast  combinations 
of  workingmen  and  by  the  propaganda  of  the  more  radical  repre 
sentatives  of  labour.  But  unless  the  record  of  the  decay  of 
liberty  in  the  past  has  been  falsely  written,  the  menace  of  the 
ultimate  overthrow  of  popular  institutions  from  the  growth  and 
concentration  of  wealth  cannot  be  disregarded.  A  careful  con 
sideration  of  what  the  past  should  teach  us  in  regard  to  this  vital 
question  is  necessary  for  our  national  safety. 


CHAPTER  XI 
THE  LEAGUE  TO  ENFORCE  PEACE 

GOD  speed  the  day  when  the  advancing  hours 

Shall  bring  the  world  a  league  of  sovereign  powers, 

Wherein  the  right  of  single  states  shall  bend 

To  the  just  will  of  all,  and  the  decrees 

Of  some  great  world  tribunal  be  the  end 

Of  wasteful  war's  superfluous  cruelties. 

My  country,  lead  thou  in  these  paths  of  peace  1 

But  till  that  hour  shall  come  let  not  soft  ease 

Relax  thy  spirit  or  subdue  thy  soul. 

Until  mankind  shall  reach  this  loftier  goal, 

Keep  thou  thy  sword  unsheathed,  for  thou  dost  hold 

Within  thy  fruitful  body  precious  seed 

Which  shall  into  a  newer  life  unfold 

And  save  the  world  in  its  extremest  need. 

Two  lessons  have  been  thine  to  teach  mankind, 

Freedom,  then  Union !     Send  thy  heralds  forth 

Bearing  thy  later  message  till  thou  find 

Peace,  born  of  Union,  spread  o'er  all  the  earth. 

—Centennial  Ode,  1916. 

PRELIMINARY   ORGANISATIONS 

I  had  been  interested  for  many  years  before  the  outbreak  of 
the  great  war  in  the  question  of  preserving  the  peace  of  the 
world,  but  the  Utopian  ideas  then  current  offered  no  practical 
remedy.  On  April  3,  1006,  a  conference  of  the  Inter-Collegiate 
Peace  Association  was  held  in  Richmond  at  Earlham  College,  an 
institution  under  the  control  of  Friends,  and  naturally  hospitable 
to  propaganda  in  favour  of  peace.  I  was  asked  to  speak  and, 
believing  that  some  arguments  upon  the  other  side  might  add 
zest  to  the  discussion.  I  appeared  as  the  advocatus  'diaboli,  pre 
senting  various  reasons  for  war  as  given  to  me  by  the  devil  in 
a  dream.  I  spoke  of  the  evolution  through  strife  of  all  organic 

179 


i8o      THE  LEAGUE  TO  ENFORCE  PEACE 

life;  of  the  degeneration  which  followed  long  periods  of  peace, 
especially  at  the  time  of  the  decay  of  the  Roman  Empire;  of 
the  helplessness  of  the  peace-loving  Chinese;  of  the  need  of  fur 
nishing  some  substitute  for  the  courage  which  war  developed; 
but  I  finally  concluded  my  address  with  an  argument  which  was 
not  suggested  to  me  by  my  diabolical  companion,  in  favour  of  an 
international  tribunal  to  decide  controversies  in  some  other  way 
than  by  the  sword.  My  comments  were  treated  with  great  good 
nature  by  my  peace-loving  auditors,  but  I  do 'not  recollect  that 
the  devil's  arguments  were  answered. 

At  a  later  period,  when  men  prominent  in  public  life  began 
to  take  part  in  the  movement,  there  was  still  a  good  deal  that 
was  visionary  in  their  efforts.  Some*  demanded  the  immediate 
reduction  of  armaments,  as  if  nations  could  be  expected  to  disarm 
before  they  had  any  other  means  of  securing  justice.  Others  pro 
posed  the  neutralisation  of  particular  territories,  a  measure  which 
had  already  been  unsuccessful  in  several  cases,1  and  which  was 
destined  to  a  still  greater  failure  in  respect  to  Belgium.  Others 
relied  on  the  propagation  of  peace  principles,  unmindful  of  the 
fact  that  this  had  been  one  of  the  aims  of  Christianity  for  two 
thousand  years  and  was  still  unsuccessful. 

But  if  we  sought  to  substitute  for  war,  arbitration  and  judicial 
decision,  there  was  a  real  gain. 

Arbitration  had  already  been  tried  in  a  good  many  cases,  and 
war  had  never  followed,  and  if  a  permanent  court  could  be  sub 
stituted  for  this  more  temporary  expedient,  even  better  results 
might  be  hoped  for. 

But  there  would  still  be  lacking  a  most  important  feature — the 
executive  power  to  enforce  the  decrees  of  the  court.  Some  said 
that  international  public  opinion  would  be  sufficient.  Public 
opinion  is  more  effective  and  definite  in  smaller  units  than  in 
larger  ones,  and  international  public  opinion  is  not  nearly  as 
strong  as  national  public  opinion.  It  might  be  strong  enough 
to  induce  the  most  highly  developed  nations  not  wantonly  to  break 
the  clear  terms  of  a  solemn  treaty,  and  perhaps  strong  enough 
to  prevent  a  nation  which  had  voluntarily  submitted  a  case  to 

1  E.g.,  Cracow,  Samoa,  the  Congo. 


PRELIMINARY  ORGANISATIONS  181 

arbitration  from  repudiating  the  award,  if  no  very  vital  interest 
was  affected.  But  on  the  whole  the  compelling  power  of  inter 
national  public  opinion  is  rather  a  hope  for  the  future  than  the 
attainment  of  the  present. 

The  substantial  foundations  for  this  hope  were  well  illustrated, 
however,  by  the  growth  of  public  opinion  in  our  own  country  in 
reference  to  the  Federal  Supreme  Court.  The  Constitution  gave 
that  court  jurisdiction  in  cases  between  States  and  the  citizens  of 
other  States,  yet  when  it  was  held,  in  Chisholm  against  Georgia, 
that  this  authorised  the  citizen  of  one  State  to  sue  another  State, 
Georgia  successfully  defied  the  judgment  of  the  court.  In  like 
manner  Pennsylvania  resisted  the  court's  decree  in  the  case  of  the 
sloop  Active,  and  in  the  Cherokee  case  Georgia  again  defied  the 
court's  decision  that  a  State  law  was  unconstitutional,  and  in  this 
defiance  was  supported  by  President  Jackson.  Again  in  1859, 
a  man,  convicted  in  Wisconsin  for  violating  the  fugitive  slave  law, 
was  liberated  by  the  State  court  on  the  ground  that  the  law  was 
unconstitutional,  though  the  Federal  Supreme  Court  had  held  the 
contrary.  In  all  these  cases  the  public  opinion  of  a  particular 
State  would  not  permit  the  enforcement  of  the  decrees  of  the 
Federal  tribunal. 

Yet  the  Supreme  Court  has  constantly  grown  in  power,  and 
no  State  would  now  resist  its  decrees.  The  court  has  never  yet 
applied  to  any  other  authority  than  public  opinion  to  carry  out 
a  judgment  against  a  State,  but  it  may  well  be  that  the  fear  of 
other  powers  in  reserve  helped  to  form  and  strengthen  that 
opinion. 

While  we  could  not  hope  that  public  opinion  would  grow  so 
readily  among  nations  differing  in  language,  blood  and  social 
usages  far  more  than  the  homogeneous  States  of  the  Federal  union, 
yet  if  an  international  court  should  act  with  as  much  wisdom 
and  justice  as  had  characterised  the  decisions  of  our  own  tribunal, 
international  public  opinion  would  gradually  grow  until  the  bulk 
of  its  decisions  would  be  respected  and  enforced.  In  order  that 
such  a  result  should  be  attained,  the  court  should  not  be  over 
loaded  with  too  large  a  jurisdiction  at  the  outset.  The  thing  to 
do  was  to  get  the  court  and  then  enlarge  its  jurisdiction  as  the 
way  should  open  and  public  opinion  should  become  ripe. 


182      THE  LEAGUE  TO  ENFORCE  PEACE 

Nor  was  it  desirable  that  all  the  nations  should  at  once  co 
operate  in  the  formation  of  this  tribunal.  It  would  be  far  better 
to  let  it  be  composed  of  judges  from  those  nations  only  whose 
history  and  institutions  should  give  reasonable  hope  that  they 
would  submit  to  its  decrees. 

But  something  still  more  specific  should  be  done  in  support 
of  its  decisions.  The  nations  taking  part  in  its  organisation 
should  mutually  guarantee  that  they  should  be  enforced.  Of 
course  there  would  be  nothing  but  international  public  opinion 
behind  such  an  agreement,  but  public  opinion  is  generally  much 
stronger  in  favour  of  the  fulfilment  of  a  specific  promise  than  of 
a  general  duty. 

I  urged  these  views  at  various  meetings  of  the  Society  for  the 
Judicial  Settlement  of  International  Disputes,  at  two  Mohonk 
conferences,  and  at  a  conference  held  in  Cleveland,  in  1915,  to 
consider  the  subject  of  a  world  court  and  an  International  League. 
It  seemed  to  me  that  the  establishment  of  such  a  court  would  not 
only  be  desirable  of  itself,  but  still  more  desirable  as  a  step  in 
that  great  movement  which  might  lead  at  last  to  a  federation  of 
mankind;  that  in  the  future  the  world  was  bound  to  become  at 
some  time  either  a  consolidated  empire  or  a  federation  of  nations. 
The  development  of  the  family  into  the  clan,  of  the  clan  into  the 
tribe,  of  the  tribe  into  the  nation,  and  then  the  union  of  inde 
pendent  States  into  great  federated  republics  and  great  empires — 
this  development  left  only  one  step  still  to  be  taken,  and  by  all 
the  analogies  of  sociology  and  history  the  world  would  be  sure 
to  take  it. 


THE  LEAGUE  TO  ENFORCE  PEACE 

It  was  about  this  time,  considerably  after  the  outbreak  of  the 
war,  but  before  we  had  become  engaged  in  the  struggle,  that  an 
association  was  proposed  to  promote  the  peace  of  the  world  by 
means  of  an  international  league.  At  the  head  of  this  move 
ment  was  ex-President  Taft,  and  prominent  among  its  counsels 
were  A.  Lawrence  Lowell,  Alton  B.  Parker,  Oscar  S.  Straus,  Theo 
dore  Marburg,  and  Hamilton  Holt. 

A  call  was  issued  and  the  plan  proposed  was  that  all  justiciable 


THE  LEAGUE  TO  ENFORCE  PEACE      183 

controversies  should  be  referred  to  an  international  tribunal  for 
decision,  and  non-justiciable  questions  to  a  Council  of  Concilia 
tion  for  recommendation  and  report,  and  that  both  the  economic 
and  military  forces  of  the  signatory  powers  were  to  be  employed 
against  any  of  them  that  committed  acts  of  hostility  against 
another,  before  the  controversy  should  be  so  submitted,  and  for 
a  reasonable  time  after  the  court  had  decided  or  the  Council  had 
reported.  Further  rules  of  international  law  were  to  be  formu 
lated  by  conference  between  the  powers.2 

On  June  17,  1915,  the  "League  to  Enforce  Peace"  (as  it  was 
called)  was  accordingly  organised  at  Philadelphia,  in  Independ 
ence  Hall.  William  H.  Taft  became  its  president  and  A.  Lawrence 
Lowell,  president  of  Harvard,  chairman  of  its  executive  commit 
tee.  I  was  present  at  the  time  of  its  organisation  and  stated  what 
I  considered  was  the  initial  difficulty  in  the  call.  What  were 
justiciable  questions?  The  few  cases  decided  had  failed  to  give 
any  complete  classification.  The  twilight  zone  of  the  undeter 
mined  was  still  very  extensive. 

2  Mr.  Roosevelt  had  declined  to  take  part  in  this  organisation.  I 
was  invited  to  join  it  and  on  June  4,  IQ^S,  I  wrote  to  Mr.  Roosevelt 
enclosing  a  copy  of  the  proposals  and  saying: 

"I  want  to  write  you  about  the  League  of  Peace,  proposed  by  Taft, 
Alton  B.  Parker,  etc.  I  was  invited  to  speak  at  the  Cleveland  Con 
ference  and  did  so,  approving  of  the  main  features  of  the  within  pro 
posals  but  taking  issue  upon  the  proposition  that  all  justiciable  questions 
should  be  submitted  to  a  World  Court  for  judgment,  both  upon  its 
merits  and  as  to  any  issue  of  jurisdiction. 

"I  quite  agree  with  your  position  in  'America  and  the  World  War' 
that  the  nations  ought  first  to  agree  as  to  certain  elementary  rights 
which  should  not  be  questioned,  and  then  submit  all  other  questions 
to  the  World  Court.  If  a  court  can  pass  on  what  questions  are  jus 
ticiable  and  what  are  not,  it  may  decide  anything  to  be  justiciable — 
the  right  to  exclude  aliens,  or  to  regulate  domestic  affairs,  for  instance 
— and  no  nation  could  afford  to  agree  in  advance  thus  to  surrender 
something  which  might  include  its  whole  sovereignty.  I  don't  think 
all  questions  affecting  honour  and  vital  interests  ought  to  be  excepted. 
That  would  allow  a  nation  to  call  any  subject  a  matter  of  honour 
or  vital  interest  and  so  escape  submission.  But  it  ought  to  be  agreed 
in  advance  just  what  things  are  not  to  be  submitted  and  then  let  all 
the  rest  go  in.  For  instance,  we  could  not  submit  the  Monroe  Doc- 


184      THE  LEAGUE  TO  ENFORCE  PEACE 

I  insisted  that  there  ought  to  be  certain  things  specifically 
excepted  from  the  jurisdiction  of  this  tribunal.  Every  nation 
would  insist  that  its  territorial  integrity  should  not  be  questioned, 
nor  its  right  to  manage  its  own  affairs  in  its  own  way — to  deter 
mine,  for  instance,  what  immigrants  it  would  receive.  Such 
matters  ought,  therefore,  to  be  specified  in  the  treaty  which  created 
the  court  and  ought  to  be  excluded  from  submission. 

Therefore,  upon  my  motion,  an  amendment  was  made  to  the 
article,  referring  to  the  court  all  justiciable  controversies,  by  add 
ing  the  words,  "Subject  to  the  limitations  of  treaties."  Thus  the 
particular  questions  which  each  nation  was  unwilling  to  refer 
would  first  be  specified  in  the  treaty  and  excepted  from  such  ref 
erence. 

The  main  purpose  of  the  plan  proposed  was  to  provide  a  breath 
ing  time  in  which  to  settle  controversies  before  the  beginning  of 
hostilities.  And  the  provisions  were  valuable,  not  so  much  from 
their  immediate  effect,  as  on  account  of  the  prospect  they  offered 
for  a  closer  union  of  the  nations.  This  league  might  finally  de- 


trine ;  that  is  necessary  to  our  national  defence,  and  we  could  not  let 
any  court  take  it  away  from  us,  as  an  international  court  certainly 
would  do  if  it  had  a  free  hand  in  the  matter.  So,  too,  Japan  might 
well  except  from  submission  the  question  whether  Western  powers 
should  acquire  additional  territory  in  the  Far  East.  These  matters, 
as  you  say,  should  be  guaranteed  in  the  initial  treaty.  .  .  . 

"Now  I  was  asked  to  join  in  calling  the  League  of  Peace  Conference 
in  Independence  Hall  on  June  I7th  to  discuss  the  Taft  proposals.  The 
letter  wanted  me  to  sign  an  approval  of  those  proposals.  This  I 
declined  to  do,  stating  my  objections,  but  saying  that  in  other  respects 
I  was  in  favour  of  the  movement.  They  accordingly  put  me  down 
as  one  of  the  callers  of  the  Conference,  and  I  expect  to  attend  and 
state  my  objections  there  if  I  have  the  opportunity  to  do  so." 

To  this  Mr.  Roosevelt  answered  on  June  i6th : 
"DEAR  FOULKE: 

"Of  course  I  agree  absolutely  with  your  letter.  You  have  stated  the 
reason  why  I  declined  to  take  part  in  that  Conference.  I  hope  that 
you  will  take  part,  in  view  of  your  name  having  been  appended  to  the 
call,  and  be  able  to  make  your  statement  just  as  you  outlined  it; 
and  I  will  try  also  to  make  a  statement  to  the  same  effect.  .  .  ." 


THE  LEAGUE  TO  ENFORCE  PEACE      185 

velop  (like  the  United  States  under  the  Articles  of  Confederation) 
into  a  more  perfect  union,  the  initial  defects  being  gradually  reme 
died  as  they  became  apparent.3 

After  the  United  States  entered  the  war,  our  executive  com 
mittee  prepared  a  number  of  tentative  suggestions  for  a  proposed 
League  of  Nations  and  submitted  them  to  President  Wilson  but, 
at  his  request,  we  refrained  from  giving  them  publicity. 

It  was  hard  to  find  out  what  the  President  favoured.  If  he 
had  any  definite  proposals  he  apparently  did  not  desire  co 
operation,  but  merely  ratification  of  such  things  as  he  saw  fit  to 
do.  After  the  armistice  was  signed  and  he  went  abroad  the 
people  were  left  as  much  in  the  dark  as  ever  as  to  what  kind  of 


3  Early  in  1917  (nearly  two  years  after  the  organisation  of  the 
League  to  Enforce  Peace)  Mr.  Roosevelt  made  some  severe  strictures 
in  the  Metropolitan  Magazine,  and  elsewhere,  upon  those  who  were 
connected  with  it.  The  League,  he  said,  was  supported  by  too  many 
professional  pacifists  whose  influence  was  an  unmixed  evil.  He  spoke 
of  it  as  a  mischievous  sham,  because  it  had  not  adopted  obligatory 
military  training.  It  would  be  wicked  to  make  such  promises  as  it 
proposed  until  after  we  had  built  up  a  military  force  that  would  make 
them  effective.  Under  it  the  Monroe  Doctrine  could  be  submitted  to 
an  arbitral  tribunal,  in  which  Chinese  and  Turkish  judges  might  deliver 
the  casting  votes. 

On  March  igth  I  wrote  him  reminding  him  that  he  had  hoped  I 
would  take  part  in  it  and  propose  the  amendment  that  it  should  be  sub 
ject  to  the  limitations  of  treaties,  these  treaties  to  contain  the  vital 
matters  which  we  would  not  submit.  I  had  done  so,  the  amendment 
was  adopted,  and  I  had  accordingly  joined  the  League  and  had  been 
placed  on  its  executive  committee,  and  that  I  did  not  altogether  ap 
preciate  being  included  in  his  criticism  that  agitation  in  favour  of  this 
movement  was  infamous  and  against  international  morality,  or  that 
the  League  proposed  a  quack  nostrum  and  that  it  was  wicked  to  agi 
tate  for  it.  I  added : 

"In  your  article  on  'Utopia  or  Hell/  in  the  book  'America  and  the 
World  War,'  I  think  you  stood  for  substantially  this  principle,  as  your 
letter  to  me  of  June  i6th  would  indicate,  and  further  think  that  you 
are  mistaken  in  considering  that  the  bulk  of  the  men  controlling  the 
movement  are  pacifists.  Indeed,  at  the  last  meeting  of  the  executive 
committee  a  few  days  since  it  seemed  to  me  none  of  them  were,  and 
I  enclose  resolutions  passed  at  different  times  which  indicate  that  this 
has  never  been  its  attitude.  It  refused  to  take  part  in  a  recent  peace 


i86      THE  LEAGUE  TO  ENFORCE  PEACE 

a  league  he  desired.  The  negotiations  were  secret,  and  little  was 
known  as  to  which  of  the  provisions  of  the  Covenant  were  due 
to  his  initiative  and  which  to  the  insistence  of  others. 


THE   LEAGUE   OF    NATIONS 

The  final  covenant  included  in  the  Versailles  treaty  differed 
widely  from  any  of  the  previous  plans.4 


conference  and  expressly  recommended  to  its  members  that  they  should 
not  attend. 

To  this  he  answered: 

"DEAR  FOULKE: 

"Now  I  must  confess  that  I  had  forgotten  about  your  being  in  the 
League  to  Enforce  Peace,  but  if  you  will  read  what  I  have  said  a 
little  more  carefully,  you  will  see  that  I  carefully  guarded  myself,  and 
attacked  only  the  people  who  are  in  that  League  as  a  means  to  avoid 
doing  their  duty  in  the  present.  .  .  .  Give  me  a  chance  to  see  you  the 
first  opportunity.  It  isn't  necessary  for  me  to  say  that  I  swear  by  you 
and  your  family  in  every  way. 

"Faithfully  yours, 

"THEODORE  ROOSEVELT." 

4  In  one  respect  this  was  made  necessary  by  the  changed  conditions. 
A  number  of  new  nations  required  the  care  and  tutelage  of  others 
to  protect  them  from  predatory  neighbours  and  to  help  them  develop 
their  institutions,  so  the  question  of  mandatory  powers  was  inevitably 
inwoven  in  the  treaty. 

Naturally  the  main  questions  involved  were:  Who  should  compose 
the  League?  What  should  be  the  extent  of  its  powers,  and  what  the 
obligations  of  each  of  its  members?  The  first  nations  to  compose  it 
were  necessarily  the  allied  and  associated  powers — those  which  had 
declared  war  against  Germany,  some  thirty-two  in  all,  of  which  the 
five  leading  nations  were  Great  Britain,  France,  Italy,  Japan,  and  the 
United  States.  Thirteen  neutral  nations  were  also  invited.  The  Cen 
tral  powers  and  certain  others  could  be  admitted  afterwards  by  consent 
of  two-thirds  of  the  nations  already  in. 

The  organs  of  the  League  were  an  Assembly,  a  Council  and  a  Sec 
retariat.  In  the  Assembly  each  nation  might  have  three  delegates  but 
only  one  vote.  But  the  real  power  of  the  League  was  conferred  upon 
the  Council,  composed  of  representatives  of  the  five  great  powers  and 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS  187 

It  was  on  the  whole  a  very  clumsy  document,  perhaps  inevitably 
so,  for  it  is  hard  to  get  many  nations  to  agree  unanimously  to 
complicated  provisions.  It  would  have  been  better  to  have 
adopted  some  simpler  plan  like  that  originally  proposed  by  the 
League  to  Enforce  Peace. 

Moreover,  the  manner  in  which  President  Wilson  acted  in  pre 
paring  this  covenant  naturally  aroused  resentment.  The  Consti 
tution  says  that  the  President  is  to  make  treaties  by  and  with 
the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate.  That  means  something 


four  other  members  to  be  elected  by  the  Assembly.  The  Council  was 
to  meet  each  year,  and  the  Assembly  at  stated  periods  to  be  afterwards 
fixed,  or  oftener,  if  so  determined. 

The  Secretariat  was  appointed  by  the  Council,  with  the  approval  of 
the  majority  of  the  Assembly,  and  had  no  independent  authority. 

Every  determination  of  the  Council  (except  in  a  few  specified  cases) 
must  be  by  unanimous  vote.  This  provision  was  certain  to  paralyse 
its  efficiency,  but  unless  unanimity  were  required  there  were  nations 
which  would  not  give  up  their  sovereignty  by  joining  a  League  where 
they  might  be  outvoted. 

The  paramount  object  of  the  League  was  to  secure  peace,  first,  by 
the  reduction  of  armaments ;  second,  by  the  guarantee  of  the  integrity 
and  independence  of  the  members,  and,  third,  by  providing  for  arbi 
tration  and  conciliation.  The  Council  was  to  formulate  plans  to  reduce 
armaments,  subject  to  revision  every  ten  years.  Since  this  must  be 
done  unanimously  there  was  doubt  how  far  the  Council  could  go. 
There  was  nothing  to  compel  any  nation  to  adopt  these  plans,  but  if 
adopted  no  nation  could  increase  its  armaments  so  fixed  without  the 
unanimous  concurrence  of  the  Council. 

By  Article  Ten  the  members  undertook  to  preserve  as  against  exter 
nal  aggression  the  territorial  integrity  and  political  independence  of 
the  nations  belonging  to  the  League,  and  the  Council  was  to  advise 
upon  the  means  by  which  this  should  be  done. 

This  article  was  obscure.  Suppose  no  advice  was  given  (and  a  single 
member  might  prevent  it),  what  then  was  the  force  of  this  obligation? 
Could  a  nation  refuse  to  perform  it?  Or  was  each  still  bound  to 
resist  such  aggression  by  force  of  arms?  The  article,  therefore, 
seemed  to  be  either  ineffective  or  else  imposing  heavy  responsibilities. 

The  third  method  of  preserving  peace  was  much  like  the  one  which 
had  been  proposed  by  our  League  to  Enforce  Peace.  Each  nation 
agreed  to  submit  all  disputes  either  to  arbitration  or  to  enquiry  by  the 
Council,  and  not  to  resort  to  war  until  three  months  after  the  award 
or  report.  Should  any  nation  violate  this  provision,  it  was  deemed 


i88      THE  LEAGUE  TO  ENFORCE  PEACE 

more  than  mere  consent.  While  it  is  true  that  many  treaties 
have  been  first  made  by  the  Executive  and  then  submitted,  it  has 
also  been  common  during  the  negotiations  for  the  President  to 
confer  informally  with  members  of  the  Senate  Committee  on  For 
eign  Affairs  and  with  other  leaders.  There  never  was  a  time  when 
mutual  co-operation  was  so  important  as  at  the  close  of  the  World 
War,  yet  President  Wilson  apparently  consulted  with  no  Senators 
at  all  and  gave  none  an  opportunity  to  participate  in  what  he  did. 
All  this  was  calculated  to  exasperate  them. 


to  have  committed  an  act  of  war  against  all  other  members,  and  the 
others  would  then  undertake  to  prohibit  trade  and  intercourse  with 
such  offending  nation,  and  the  Council  was  to  recommend  what  mili 
tary  and  naval  forces  should  be  contributed  by  each  to  the  armaments 
needed.  This  was  the  most  valuable  provision  of  the  covenant,  but  it 
was  much  weaker  than  the  proposals  originally  made  by  our  League 
to  Enforce  Peace.  In  the  covenant  there  was  no  division  into  jus 
ticiable  and  non-justiciable  cases,  nor  was  any  court  created  at  all. 
The  members  merely  agreed  to  submit  to  arbitration  such  disputes  as 
they  wished.  All  others  went  to  the  Council,  which  merely  reported 
its  recommendations.  Either  party  could  appeal  to  the  Assembly.  If 
the  report  of  that  body  was  unanimous,  outside  the  parties  to  the 
dispute,  the  members  agreed  that  they  would  not  go  to  war  with  the 
party  which  complied  with  the  recommendation.  Such  unanimity,  how 
ever,  might  be  hard  to  secure,  and  if  there  were  no  unanimous  report 
the  nations  reserved  the  right  to  take  such  action  as  they  considered 
necessary.  In  these  cases  wars  might  still  occur. 

The  covenant  might  be  amended,  if  the  amendment  were  ratified 
unanimously  by  the  nine  members  of  the  Council  and  also  by  a  majority 
of  the  members  represented  in  the  Assembly.  Amendments,  therefore, 
would  be  all  but  impossible  where  there  was  any  serious  conflict  of 
opinion. 

And  yet  the  permanency  of  the  League  was  not  secured,  for  any 
nation  might  withdraw  upon  two  years'  notice,  if  it  had  fulfilled  its 
obligations.  Here  again  there  was  room  for  controversy.  Who  was 
to  decide  whether  its  obligations  had  been  fulfilled? 

The  reference  to  the  Monroe  Doctrine  was  vague  and  obscure.  No 
one  could  say  what  was  meant  by  it  or  who  was  to  decide  what  that 
Doctrine  was. 

The  covenant  did  not  set  up  any  international  court,  although  it 
provided  that  the  Council  was  to  do  this  thereafter.  Nor  were  there 
any  specific  provisions  as  to  the  further  development  of  international 
law. 


THE  LEAGUE  OF  NATIONS  189 

There  were,  moreover,  many  provisions  in  this  complicated 
covenant  which  were  unacceptable  to  the  American  people.  Prom 
inent  among  these  was  Article  X,  by  which  the  United  States,  in 
joining  the  League,  would  undertake  to  preserve  the  territorial 
integrity  of  every  other  member  against  external  aggression. 

The  result  was  inevitable.  The  Senate  refused  to  consent  to 
the  treaty,  and  our  country  still  remains  outside  of  the  League 
of  Nations.  The  fact  that  such  a  League  has  been  formed,  how 
ever,  among  many  other  nations,  and  that,  even  without  our 
co-operation,  meetings  of  the  Assembly  and  Council  are  regu 
larly  held  and  important  action  taken,  indicates  that  a  substantial 
advance  has  been  made  toward  the  elimination  of  war  among  the 
members  of  the  League,  and  however  inconclusive  may  appear  all 
that  has  been  done  up  to  the  present  time,  yet  the  germ  of  a 
World  Federation  may  still  be  lurking  in  this  organisation,  which, 
like  our  own  Articles  of  Confederation,  may  at  last  lead  to  "a 
more  perfect  Union"  for  the  establishment  and  maintenance  of 
the  future  peace  of  the  world. 


CHAPTER  XII 

THE  WORLD  WAR 

CHILDREN  of  liberty,  whereso'er  ye  be, 

Forward  to  battle  till  the  world  is  free ! 

Come  from  sturdy  England,  from  heroic  France, 

Rise  from  stricken  Belgium;  Italy,  advance! 

Look !    We  stand  beside  you,  freedom's  eldest  born ; 

We  would  share  the  laurels  from  the  tyrant  torn. 

Glorious  the  gospel  comes  across  the  sea; 

On  then  to  battle  till  the  world  is  free ! 

— Children  of  Liberty. 

OUTBREAK  OF   THE   STRUGGLE 

When  the  great  war  broke  out  I  was  in  Germany,  at  the  baths 
at  Nauheim.  I  had  gone  there  from  Italy  about  the  first  of  July, 
1914,  and  was  there  during  all  the  preliminaries  of  the  world 
struggle.  Everything  came  on  with  great  deliberation.  The  mur 
der  of  the  Austrian  archduke  at  Sarajevo  was  followed  by  a 
period  of  silence.  The  newspapers  said  the  Austrian  Government 
was  "investigating,"  but  there  was  no  hint  as  to  what  this  por 
tended.  Then  came  the  ultimatum.  There  were  no  great  head 
lines  as  in  American  papers;  the  comment  was  scanty,  but  to 
those  who  read  the  text  carefully  it  seemed  clear  that  war  was 
meant.  The  Germans  themselves  said  that  no  Servian  ministry 
could  yield  to  such  terms  and  live,  but  they  added  that  it  was 
not  Germany  but  Austria  which  had  made  these  hard  demands, 
though  of  course  Germany  would  finally  have  to  support  her 
ally.  Then  beyond  all  expectation,  the  Servian  Government  con 
ceded  everything  demanded  which  did  not  involve  the  relinquish- 
ment  by  Servia  of  her  own  sovereignty  within  her  own  borders, 
and  even  as  to  this  she  offered  to  let  the  powers  or  the  Hague 
decide  the  question.  That  should  have  been  enough,  but  Aus 
tria  had  determined  upon  war.  Meanwhile  what  counsel  had 
been  given  by  Germany  to  her  ally?  Was  she  advised  to  soften 

190 


OUTBREAK  OF  THE  STRUGGLE  igi 

her  conditions  or  was  she  assured  of  aid  to  wreak  her  will  upon 
Servia?  On  all  this  there  was  silence.  Austria  next  declared  war 
upon  Servia,  and  now  the  question  was,  What  would  Russia  do? 
She  had  not  stirred  some  years  before  when  Bosnia  and  Herzego 
vina  were  annexed.  Would  she  move  now?  Few  thought  it ;  still 
the  ties  of  blood  were  strong.  Servia  and  Russia  were  both  Slav 
States,  and  Russia  had  been  the  protector  of  the  smaller  king 
dom.  Could  she  abandon  her  ward?  In  the  public  press,  in 
spired  by  the  government,  the  task  of  Germany  was  declared  to 
be  "to  localise  the  war."  That  meant  to  let  Servia  be  crushed 
by  her  powerful  neighbour.  Soon  the  Muscovite  began  to  move. 
Then  there  was  more  diplomatic  manoeuvring  until  it  was  an 
nounced  in  the  newspapers  that  the  mobilisation  of  Russia's  army 
had  shattered  the  hope  of  peace.  "War  danger"  was  declared,  and 
the  order  came  to  us  that  all  letters  must  be  left  unsealed  and 
written  in  German  only;  nor  could  any  one  talk  over  the  tele 
phone  except  in  that  language.  In  conversing  with  a  friend  I 
used  a  short  English  phrase  and  was  instantly  stopped  by  the 
operator,  who  was  listening  at  the  central  office.  War  was  now 
declared  on  Russia.  Then  the  demand  was  made  on  France  that 
she  disclose  her  attitude,  and  when  the  answer  came  that  it  would 
be  what  her  honour  and  her  interest  demanded,  war  was  declared 
on  her  too  because  she  had  not  promised  neutrality.  Notices 
were  then  posted  on  trees  and  fences  and  in  other  public  places, 
of  "MobUisirttng"  giving  the  time  and  place  for  the  assembling 
of  those  called.  Everything  else  had  been  prepared  long  before. 

It  was  announced  that  regular  trains  would  continue  to  run  for 
two  days,  and  that  afterwards  nothing  but  troops  and  arms  would 
be  transported.  Travellers  who  wished  to  leave  must  depart  at 
once.  There  was  a  wild  scramble  to  get  away.  The  cabs  drove 
up  in  lines,  loaded  with  baggage.  This  became  so  congested  when 
it  reached  the  Frankfort  railroad  station  that  literally  miles  of  it, 
twenty  feet  high,  were  piled  upon  the  long  platforms.  The  cars 
were  so  packed  that  eighteen  persons  occupied  compartments 
intended  for  four  or  six  and  had  to  stand  jammed  together,  often 
all  day  and  sometimes  all  night. 

I  determined  under  these  circumstances  to  wait  quietly,  finish 
my  course  of  baths,  and  take  my  chances  of  getting  out  later, 


192  THE  WORLD  WAR 

though  it  was  now  evident  that  we  were  at  the  beginning  of  the 
greatest  war  in  history.  At  the  end  of  the  two  days  mobilisation 
began  and  all  civil  traffic  was  stopped.  There  were  indeed  a  few 
local  trains,  but  on  these  it  took  three  or  four  days  to  reach  Ber 
lin,  only  a  few  hours  distant.  The  mails  were  practically  sus 
pended,  and  even  telegrams  from  the  American  Ambassador,  of 
which  I  received  two  or  three  each  day,  arrived  several  days  after 
they  were  sent.  I  watched  the  mobilisation.  It  was  a  piece  of 
clockwork,  moving  with  chronometer  accuracy.  Not  only  had 
every  reservist  received  his  orders  months  before,  but  every  horse, 
every  automobile  with  its  provision  of  gasoline,  in  short,  every 
object  which  could  be  devoted  to  military  uses  had  been  cata 
logued,  together  with  the  price  to  be  paid  for  it.  The  money 
needed  was  on  hand,  taken  from  the  war  reserve.  Everything 
was  paid  for  and  instantly  seized  by  the  military  authorities.  I 
saw  horses  standing  side  by  side,  in  a  line  perhaps  a  mile  in 
length,  which  were  taken  and  paid  for  in  this  manner.  Automo 
biles  were  thus  confiscated  and  the  owners  walked. 

The  reserves  came  marching  down  the  streets  in  citizens'  clothes, 
singing  their  German  melodies,  Die  Wacht  am  Rhein,  Wenn 
ich  komm,  wenn  ich  komm,  wenn  ich  wiederum  komm,  etc.  They 
marched  to  the  fortress  of  Friedberg,  a  mile  away.  Every  man's 
uniform  and  other  belongings  were  ready  in  a  box  marked  with 
his  name,  and  in  half  an  hour  all  emerged  fully  equipped,  so  com 
plete  was  the  preparation. 

Tracks  were  guarded  at  every  hundred  yards  by  armed  men 
in  citizens'  clothes,  and  wearing  white  bands  around  their  arms 
to  show  that  they  had  been  detailed  for  this  purpose.  At  every 
bridge  there  was  a  squad  of  them,  and  at  the  stations  a  still 
larger  number.  Then  the  military  trains  started,  trains  of  inter 
minable  length,  freight  cars,  passenger  cars — everything  possible 
was  utilised.  These  trains  were  packed  with  troops  and  passed 
every  few  minutes  for  a  week.  I  stayed  awake  one  night  hearing 
them  go  by,  it  seemed  to  me  unceasingly;  more  than  one  hundred 
and  fifty  passed  in  a  single  day.  The  troops  were  cheered  as 
they  went  by  singing  their  patriotic  songs,  and  on  many  of  the 
cars  were  banners  marked  "Nach  Paris"  Notices  were  posted 
asking  the  women  to  come  with  food  to  the  station  at  certain 


OUTBREAK  OF  THE  STRUGGLE  193 

hours;  and  they  all  came  with  their  baskets.  The  contents  were 
spread  along  the  platforms  on  improvised  tables,  and  the  soldiers 
ate  and  drank  during  a  half-hour's  wait.  After  the  first  week  of 
mobilisation  I  was  told  that  five  millions  of  men  had  been  placed 
under  arms  or  sent  to  the  front.  I  do  not  know  how  accurate 
were  the  figures,  but  they  could  not  have  been  greatly  exag 
gerated  since  it  was  announced  in  the  press  that  one  million  two 
hundred  thousand  volunteers  had  been  enrolled,  besides  those 
already  liable  for  military  duty.  It  was  astounding  to  see  how 
in  a  few  days  a  great  country  could  be  stripped  of  its  men.  The 
waiters  and  the  porters  at  the  hotel,  the  men  in  the  shops,  the 
cabmen  and  the  farmers,  all  disappeared,  until  the  streets  began 
to  look  deserted.  The  bulk  of  those  who  remained  were  the 
women,  the  children,  and  the  aged.  Business  was  largely  at  a 
standstill.  The  important  industries  at  Frankfort  were  discon 
tinued,  and  most  of  the  furnace  fires  were  out. 

At  the  outset  of  the  mobilisation  it  was  announced  that  the 
country  was  infested  with  French  and  Russian  spies,  and  the 
search  for  these  began.  Many  poor  devils  were  dragged  along 
the  streets,  followed  by  crowds  of  hooting  boys,  and  as  a  whole 
some  warning  some  were  shot.  We  could  not  go  from  one  town 
to  another  without  being  searched  half  a  dozen  times.  Some 
of  us  had  to  go  to  Frankfort  to  secure  passports.  We  had  to 
get  passes  from  the  police  before  we  could  stir  a  step.  It  was 
hard  enough  to  secure  an  automobile  from  among  the  few  that 
remained,  and  although  Frankfort  was  less  than  thirty  miles  away 
we  were  stopped  eleven  times  by  military  guards,  and  our  ma 
chine  was  twice  searched  to  see  that  no  explosives  were  con 
tained  in  it. 

Up  to  this  time  there  was  nothing  in  the  newspapers  or  in 
any  information  which  was  allowed  to  reach  us  that  Germany 
was  in  any  way  responsible  for  the  outbreak  of  the  war.  She 
was  simply  supporting  her  ally,  Austria,  and  resisting  the  threat 
caused  by  the  mobilisation  of  the  Russian  army. 

But  now  we  heard  of  the  demand  made  on  Belgium  to  violate 
her  own  neutrality  and  give  free  passage  to  the  German  troops. 
She  must  reply  at  once,  and  she  obstinately  refused!  Here  was 
a  great  empire  at  bay,  with  foes  on  either  side,  and  her  small 


194  THE  WORLD  WAR 

neighbour  withheld  this  trifling  favour!  Belgium  was,  therefore, 
invaded,  and  when  some  shameless  Belgians  fired  at  the  German 
troops  from  roofs  and  windows,  their  cities  were  destroyed,  cathe 
drals  and  universities  razed,  homes  pillaged,  and  the  people  lined 
up  against  walls  and  shot.  Did  they  not  deserve  it?  True,  the 
chancellor  admitted  that  international  law  was  broken,  "but  with 
the  empire  fighting  for  its  life,  it  must  hack  its  way  through." 

It  was  this  invasion  of  Belgium  that  first  opened  our  eyes  to 
the  guilt  of  Germany.  And  now  England,  who  had  guaranteed 
Belgium's  neutrality,  joined  with  France  and  Russia  and  declared 
war.  At  this  the  German  press  and  people  howled  with  rage. 
It  was  all  a  vile  pretence  on  England's  part.  Her  motive  was 
sheer  envy.  She  wanted  to  suppress  a  business  rival,  and  for 
this  she  was  willing  to  break  her  ancient  ties  of  kindred  and 
friendship,  all  for  "a  scrap  of  paper."  Then  the  English  guests 
at  Nauheim  fell  under  the  ban,  and  their  apartments  and  their 
baggage  and  belongings  were  searched;  all  were  forbidden  under 
the  heaviest  penalties  to  go  near  the  railroad  or  the  station  or 
even  walk  through  the  neighbouring  forest.  Everybody  was  for 
bidden  to  give  any  information  on  any  military  event  or  transac 
tion,  so  I  refrained  from  writing  down  from  day  to  day  the  things 
I  saw,  lest  a  search  made  among  my  papers  might  afterwards  prove 
embarrassing. 

Ordinary  communication  with  the  outside  world  had  practi 
cally  ceased.  My  wife  was  in  England,  one  daughter,  with  her 
family,  was  in  Calabria,  in  Italy,  another  was  in  Paris,  and  two 
of  my  grandsons  were  in  Brittany.  I  could  not  get  word  to  any 
of  them,  nor  could  they  to  me.  This  isolation  continued  for  weeks. 
Letters  of  credit  were  not  honoured,  and  I  could  get  no  more 
money.  So  I  left  my  hotel  and  sought  a  cheaper  lodging  house. 
Finally  it  was  announced  that  seventy-five  dollars  a  week  would 
be  paid  on  checks  of  the  American  Express  Company,  and  I 
went  to  the  local  bank  early  every  Monday  morning  to  accumu 
late  what  I  could  for  what  might  be  an  indefinite  stay.  I  thus 
gathered  quite  a  little  sum  in  German  money,  which  nobody  would 
take  after  I  had  crossed  the  border.  We  were  held  up  in  this 
way  for  about  a  month  and  were  finally  sent  out  of  the  country 
through  Holland  on  a  special  train  made  up  for  Americans, 


OUTBREAK  OF  THE  STRUGGLE  195 

During  the  entire  mobilisation  there  was  no  intoxication,  no 
debauchery,  no  bravado.  The  temper  of  the  people  was  re 
markable.  There  was  not  a  word  of  grumbling,  and  however  they 
might  regret  the  war  they  showed  no  impatience.  They  were 
absolutely  a  unit  behind  the  Kaiser.  I  saw  indeed  tears  in  the 
eyes  of  a  grey-haired  cabman,  who  told  me  that  his  only  horse 
was  taken  and  that  he  was  too  old  to  follow  any  other  business. 
Another  poor  fellow  sighed  as  he  told  me  of  his  little  children 
who  had  no  support  now  that  he  had  to  go.  But  there  was  very 
little  even  of  such  expressions  as  these.  I  heard  of  an  old  woman 
who  was  carrying  a  heavy  burden  but  stumbled  and  fell  under 
the  weight;  some  one  who  aided  her  told  her  it  was  too  much 
for  her.  She  said  it  could  not  be  helped,  for  her  three  sons  had 
gone  to  war  and  there  was  no  one  else  to  do  the  work,  and  she 
added,  "I  pray  they  may  come  back,  but  if  not  I  am  glad  to  give 
them  all  to  my  country."  On  the  part  of  every  one  there  was 
perfect  confidence  that  victory  was  sure. 

The  slightest  wish  of  the  military  authorities  was  cheerfully 
obeyed.  A  bulletin  appeared  asking  all  to  refrain  from  drinking, 
and  it  was  observed  to  the  letter.  The  papers  announced  that 
news  would  be  censored  and  that  nothing  would  be  published 
against  the  interest  of  the  country;  but  that  it  could  be  counted 
on  that  everything  printed  would  be  strictly  true.  Everybody 
acquiesced  without  a  murmur.  Of  course  the  half  truths  con 
tained  in  such  publications  were  misleading. 

From  Holland  I  passed  on  to  England.  There  the  newspapers 
contained  much  more  information,  but  it  was  perhaps  as  mis 
leading  as  the  German  silence.  The  people  did  not  seem  to  con 
sider  the  war  a  very  serious  matter.  Russia  would  soon  over 
whelm  Germany  on  the  east,  and  the  one  hundred  and  sixty 
thousand  men  which  England  had  despatched  to  the  Continent 
would  settle  the  matter  on  the  French  frontier.  I  told  some  of 
my  English  friends  that  their  contingent  was  trifling  in  compari 
son  with  Germany's  armament;  that  Germany  had  put  millions 
in  the  field;  that  France  would  be  invaded  and  much  of  its  terri 
tory  overrun.  They  would  not  believe  me.  I  insisted  that  the 
newspapers  had  been  deluding  them  with  false  hopes  and  that 
they  were  living  in  a  fool's  paradise.  They  were  raising  recruits 


196  THE  WORLD  WAR 

by  volunteering,  a  hundred  thousand  at  a  time.  I  observed  that 
this  was  a  ridiculously  small  number,  that  the  recruits  would 
need  long  training,  and  that  a  general  conscription  would  soon  be 
found  necessary.  "Impossible!"  they  answered.  "It  would  be 
repugnant  to  English  liberty  and  to  all  our  traditions  to  raise 
armies  in  this  manner."  I  answered,  "Then  you  cannot  win  the 
war."  The  event  proved  that  conscription  was  inevitable. 

The  things  I  had  seen  showed  me  plainly  enough  how  hard  it 
would  be  for  the  Allies  to  resist  the  aggressions  of  Germany,  and 
I  was  impressed  with  the  conviction  that  my  own  country  might 
well  be  involved  in  this  great  war  before  it  was  concluded,  and 
that  it  was  our  first  duty  to  be  prepared,  that  the  price  of  safety 
was  to  arm  our  people  and  to  train  them  for  service. 

PREPAREDNESS 

We  sailed  for  home  near  the  end  of  September  on  the  ill-fated 
Lusitania.  Even  then  there  was  danger  from  submarines,  and  the 
lights  on  the  vessel  were  extinguished.  When  I  arrived  in  America 
I  found  there  was  even  less  understanding  than  in  England  of 
the  gravity  of  the  struggle.  On  reaching  Indiana  I  spoke  and 
wrote  of  what  I  had  seen  and  tried  to  arouse  public  sentiment 
as  to  the  need  for  preparation.  Although  there  was  strong  sym 
pathy  for  the  Allies,  the  feeling  of  the  country  in  favour  of 
peace,  encouraged  by  the  President,  who  had  urged  the  people 
to  be  neutral  even  in  thought,  was  all  but  unanimous  and  pre 
vented  active  preparation.  The  song,  "I  Didn't  Raise  My  Boy 
To  Be  a  Soldier,"  had  great  vogue.  An  "Anti-Enlistment  League" 
was  organised.  Very  few  seemed  to  think  it  possible  that  we 
should  become  involved.  There  was  indeed  some  agitation  on 
the  other  side.  The  National  Security  League  did  much  to  arouse 
the  people  to  their  danger.  I  myself  took  part  in  the  movement 
for  preparedness,  first  by  speeches  in  my  own  local  community, 
and  then  by  communications  to  the  press  in  various  parts  of 
the  country.1 

1  One  of  these  communications,  addressed  to  the  Indianapolis  Star,  in 
January,  1915,  was  as  follows: 
"The  advocates  of  peace  take  the  occasion  of  the  present  war  to 


PREPAREDNESS  197 

John  W.  Kern  of  Indiana,  the  Democratic  leader  of  the  Senate, 
published  an  interview  deprecating  all  preparation.  We  were 
quite  safe,  he  said,  and  there  wasn't  any  use  in  spending  money. 
I  wrote  to  him  remonstrating  vigorously,  but  quite  ineffectually, 
and  later  he  became  amusing  in  his  suggestions.  It  occurred  to 
him,  he  said,  that  we  could  save  by  using  the  uniformed  bodies 
of  various  fraternal  orders,  the  Knights  of  Pythias,  the  Ancient 
Order  of  Hibernians,  the  Knights  of  Columbus,  and  other  organi 
sations.  They  looked  good  to  him  on  parade,  and  he  wanted  them 
trained  for  national  defence.  Of  which  Life  remarked: 

"Some  informed  person  should  take  Senator  Kern  by  the  button  and 
explain  to  him  how  very  much  difference  there  is  between  modern  war 
and  a  lawn  party." 

The  Progressives  were  just  as  badly  steeped  in  the  prevailing 
indifference  as  the  members  of  either  of  the  old  parties.  Early 
in  December,  1914,  a  conference  had  been  held  in  Chicago  at 
the  call  of  the  executive  committee.  There  were  representatives 

reinforce  their  doctrines  in  favour  of  disarmament  and  non-resistance. 
It  was  the  immense  armaments  of  Europe,  they  say,  and  the  war 
spirit  which  these  armaments  created,  that  led  to  the  present  cataclysm. 
Therefore,  military  preparation  is  all  a  mistake  and  we  ought  to  be 
as  helpless  as  possible  and  thus  give  a  shining  illustration  of  our  peace 
principles  to  all  the  world. 

"Could  any  logic  be  more  fatuous?  If  indeed  all  nations  would  dis 
arm  we  should  then  be  as  safe  as  any.  But  they  will  not  disarm.  If 
either  Germany  or  the  Allies  win,  is  it  conceivable  that  the  victor 
will  throw  away  the  means  by  which  alone  he  has  preserved  his  very 
existence?  .  .  . 

"We  know  from  Bernhardi's  book  and  from  many  other  German 
sources  what  is  the  goal  of  German  ambition.  It  is  world  dominion; 
and  after  her  domination  of  Europe  is  complete,  what  better  field  on 
her  path  to  universal  power  than  the  United  States,  where  so  many 
of  Germany's  sons  already  live,  who  have  been  hitherto  largely  sym 
pathetic  with  her  purposes? 

"But  could  the  Germans  subdue  a  country  like  America?  If  they 
could  control  the  seas,  then  our  navy,  our  merchant  marine  and  our 
great  seaboard  cities  would  be  at  once  at  their  mercy,  and  with  their 
magnificent  equipment  in  artillery  and  other  implements  of  destruction, 
a  few  hundred  thousand  of  their  splendidly  trained  men  could  subdue 


198  THE  WORLD  WAR 

from  thirty-four  of  the  States.  Mr.  Murdock  of  Kansas  urged 
support  of  the  President  in  his  efforts  to  maintain  neutrality  and 
peace.  There  was  also  much  talk  of  the  necessity  of  nominating 
Roosevelt,  in  1916,  and  of  taking  the  tariff  out  of  politics  by 
means  of  a  scientific  commission,  but  not  one  word  was  said 
about  the  need  of  national  defence.  I  was  ill  and  left  before 
the  end  of  the  session,  much  disappointed. 

On  December  9,  1914,  after  my  return  home,  I  thus  wrote  to 
Mr.  George  W.  Perkins,  chairman  of  the  committee: 

"If  we  confine  our  attention  to  the  tariff  in  the  present  crisis,  it  seems 
to  me  we  should  be  following  a  wholly  wrong  scent.  The  question  at 
this  moment  is  the  question  of  our  national  defence.  If  we  are  indif 
ferent  to  that,  in  what  may  become  the  critical  period  in  our  history,  the 
country  may  very  well  become  indifferent  to  us." 

I  wrote  the  same  thing  to  Theodore  Roosevelt,  who  agreed  and 
answered  that  Wilson,  Bryan,  and  Daniels  represented  the  nadir 


any  part  of  America  they  chose  and  levy  such  tribute  for  the  con 
tinuance  of  the  war  as  to  make  our  ultimate  subjugation  only  a  matter 
of  time.  When  Germany  levies  its  scores  of  millions  upon  impoverished 
Belgium,  what  scores  of  billions  would  be  necessary  for  the  redemption 
of  New  York,  Boston  and  Philadelphia?  Such  an  outlay  might  be 
more  expensive  than  the  cost  of  the  armament  so  greatly  deprecated 
by  our  pacifist  friends.  The  little  army  we  have  to-day  and  all  we 
could  then  raise  would  be  crushed  in  a  single  campaign.  We  have 
neither  sufficient  equipment,  guns  nor  ammunition,  with  which  to  defend 
ourselves.  It  would  take  years  to  manufacture  the  cannon  and  other 
appliances  necessary  for  our  defence,  and  now  we  are  wasting  the 
golden  moments  when  the  belligerents  are  busy  with  other  things,  the 
moments  which  are  absolutely  indispensable  to  our  future  security. 
...  It  is  all  folly  to  talk  about  the  tariff  or  mere  economic  questions 
when  the  very  life  of  our  republic  may  be  at  stake.  Our  business  is 
to  prepare  for  emergencies  at  once. 

"It  is  said  that  the  people  of  Tarentum,  when  the  foe  was  at  its 
gates,  were  engaged  in  disputes  as  to  the  choral  measures  in  one  of 
the  plays  exhibited  in  the  great  theatre  of  the  city.  Speedy  destruction 
followed.  Let  us  not  be  like  the  people  of  Tarentum.  Let  us  not  wait 
until  the  foe  is  at  our  gates." 

Although  this  letter  received  favourable  editorial  comment,  it  ap 
parently  made  little  impression. 


PREPAREDNESS  199 

of  misconduct  in  reference  to  national  defence.  Mr.  Perkins 
answered  rather  ambiguously  that  he  doubted  if  the  people  had 
yet  realised  the  enormous  changes  which  the  European  war  was 
bound  to  bring  forward.  We  were  as  a  party  to  keep  our  powder 
dry,  our  lines  well  formed,  and  be  ready  to  give  the  country  the 
best  possible  service.  I  answered  that  to  speak  of  keeping  our 
powder  dry  and  our  lines  well  formed,  when  we  had  not  a  word 
to  say  on  this  important  subject,  was  to  act  like  the  Bell  and 
Everett  Party  in  1860  in  ignoring  the  slavery  question,  a  policy 
followed  by  its  early  dissolution;  that  for  myself  I  expected  to 
co-operate  with  that  party  that  gave  the  best  assurance  for  pro 
viding  for  the  national  defence.  It  was  my  belief  that  the  organi 
sation  which  took  no  thought  of  this  would  soon  pass  out  of  sight 
and  out  of  memory.  I  sent  a  copy  of  this  letter  to  Mr.  Roose 
velt,  who  answered  that  he  thought  exactly  the  same  thing;  that 
adequate  preparation  was  an  issue  more  important  than  any  other 
question  and  that  Progressives  who  backed  Wilson  in  his  so- 
called  neutrality  policy  were  doing  a  very  serious  damage  to  the 
party.  Mr.  Roosevelt  was  at  this  time  engaged  in  an  active 
propaganda  in  behalf  of  preparedness.  His  agitation  was  the 
first  powerful  agency  in  awakening  the  country. 

On  January  29,  1915, 1  spoke  at  a  dinner  of  Progressive  leaders 
in  Indianapolis.  President  Wilson  had  recently  visited  that  city 
and  had  made  a  partisan  speech  at  Tomlinson  Hall,  declaring  that 
the  Republican  Party  had  not  had  a  new  idea  for  thirty  years. 
He  had  observed  that  he  liked  to  "breathe  the  air  of  Jackson 
Day,"  apparently  unmindful  of  the  fact  that  Jackson  at  New 
Orleans  had  stood  for  the  defence  of  the  country,  while  Mr.  Wil 
son  had  said  nothing  and  had  done  nothing  toward  providing  for 
our  national  security.  I  criticised  this  inconsistency  and  added: 

"There  is  to-day  a  wave  of  midwinter  madness  sweeping  over  large 
numbers  of  our  citizens  who  insist  that  it  is  our  duty  to  remain  dis 
armed  and  by  our  helplessness  to  give  a  shining  illustration  of  our 
peace  principles  to  all  mankind. 

"Mr.  Carnegie  tells  us  that  those  who  demand  security  against  foreign 
aggression  are  as  bad  as  the  man  who  wanted  a  lightning  rod  put  up 
over  his  back  when  he  walked  through  the  streets,  and  that  the  farmers 
of  our  country,  coming  together  without  artillery  or  other  arms  than 


200  THE  WORLD  WAR 

their  shotguns,  could  overcome  the  disciplined  troops  that  any  power 
in  the  world  might  send  against  us. 

"I  expect,"  I  added,  "to  vote  for  that  party  and  that  candidate  that 
gives  me  the  strongest  assurance  that  our  country  shall  be  defended. 
If  the  Republican  Party  is  the  only  one  which  can  supply  it,  I  intend 
to  hold  my  nose  and  vote  for  any  unregenerate  rascal  it  may  nominate 
if  he  is  the  only  man  who  gives  me  such  assurance." 

Those  who  were  there  responded  enthusiastically,  yet  the  great 
body  of  our  people  were  still  asleep.  It  was  uphill  work,  this 
demand  for  a  suitable  armament. 

Roosevelt's  efforts  throughout  the  country  were  indeed  begin 
ning  to  produce  an  impression,  but  so  far  as  the  Progressive  or 
ganisation  was  concerned  little  was  done. 

On  February  22,  Washington's  birthday,  I  was  asked  to  deliver 
an  address  at  Anderson,  Indiana,  and  after  quoting  his  advice 
to  Congress  urging  military  preparation,  I  declared  that  it  was 
an  empty  service  to  honour  and  praise  the  Father  of  our  Country 
and  yet  to  repudiate  his  counsels.  Would  he  not  look  down  in 
solemn  reprobation  upon  the  unworthy  descendants  of  the  vet 
erans  of  Bunker  Hill  and  Valley  Forge  and  Yorktown  who  had 
taken  so  little  thought  to  preserve  the  precious  inheritance  which 
he  and  his  companions  had  bequeathed? 

I  addressed  several  other  meetings  to  stir  up  public  opinion 
in  favour  of  preparedness,  and  delivered  at  the  State  House  in 
Indianapolis  the  Centennial  Ode  on  the  hundredth  anniversary  of 
Indiana's  admission  to  the  Union.  In  this  too  I  urged  the  impor 
tance  of  preparing  for  the  struggle  which  confronted  us. 

Gradually,  however,  the  knowledge  of  our  danger  began  to 
permeate  the  consciousness  of  the  people.  Even  the  President 
seemed  to  be  becoming  aware  of  it,  and  in  New  York,  on  Janu 
ary  27,  1916,  he  began  a  series  of  speeches  in  favour  of  prepared 
ness,  saying,  "I  would  be  ashamed  if  I  had  not  learned  something 
in  fourteen  months,"  and  suggesting  the  possibility  that  the  United 
States  might  be  drawn  into  the  war.  In  Cleveland  he  declared 
the  country  must  prepare  as  promptly  as  possible,  because  he 
could  not  tell  what  another  day  would  bring  forth,  and  in 
St.  Louis,  "I  assure  you  there  is  not  a  day  to  be  lost." 

This  was  the  year  of  the  Presidential  election,  and  the  three 


THE  CONSCRIPTION  BOARD  201 

parties,  including  the  Progressives,  now  all  advocated  preparation. 
Yet  the  re-election  of  Mr.  Wilson  was  very  largely  due  to  the 
feeling  that  he  had  "kept  us  out  of  war,"  and  would  still  continue 
to  do  so.  This,  however,  was  soon  found  to  be  impossible,  and 
shortly  after  his  inauguration  war  was  declared. 


THE   CONSCRIPTION   BOARD 

When  America  entered  the  struggle  I  did  what  little  I  could 
to  help.  1  had  offered  my  services  to  Mr.  Roosevelt  in  case  he 
could  use  me  in  connection  with  his  proposed  expedition  to  France. 
But  as  he  did  not  have  an  opportunity  to  go,  nothing  came  of  it. 
Naturally  a  man  nearly  seventy  years  of  age  cannot  enter  the 
military  service,  so  I  had  to  content  myself  with  such  work  asi 
I  could  do  at  home.  I  took  part  in  the  "drives"  for  Liberty 
loans,  Red  Cross  and  the  like,  and  I  was  appointed  Government 
agent  for  our  local  conscription  board.  At  the  request  of  this 
board  I  was  present  at  its  daily  sessions  and  acted  as  its  gen 
eral  adviser,  scrutinising  the  lists  and  examining  the  witnesses 
and  documents.  I  thus  had  ample  opportunity  to  see  the  prac 
tical  workings  of  the  conscription  law. 

Considering  the  immense  number  of  men  who  had  to  be  drafted 
by  means  of  an  organisation  suddenly  created  and  composed  of 
men  who  had  no  knowledge  of  military  affairs,  the  system  devel 
oped  by  Provost  Marshal  General  Crowder  was  admirable.  There 
were  many  mistakes,  especially  in  the  beginning,  but  the  work 
as  a  whole  was  done  far  better  than  we  had  a  right  to 
expect. 

To  prevent  fraudulent  claims  for  exemption  I  caused  the  lists 
to  be  published  in  the  daily  papers  as  they  came  up  for  con 
sideration,  together  with  a  notice  calling  upon  all  citizens  to 
give  information  of  anything  showing  that  an  exemption  made 
by  the  local  board  was  improper.  I  received  some  letters  in 
answer  to  this  publication,  but  in  proportion  to  the  entire  number 
the  cases  alleged  to  be  fraudulent  were  very  few.  I  also  went 
over  the  lists  with  the  chief  of  police  and  with  a  number  of 
persons  who  had  a  wide  acquaintance  throughout  the  county,  and 
I  examined  the  tax  duplicates  to  see  whether  the  persons  who 


202  THE  WORLD  WAR 

were  said  to  be  dependent  had  other  adequate  means  of  support. 

Richmond  was  originally  a  Quaker  community,  and  there  were 
still  many  Friends  living  there  and  in  the  adjoining  country. 
Naturally  one  would  expect  that  there  would  be  large  numbers 
of  persons  who  would  claim  exemption  on  the  ground  that  they 
belonged  to  a  society  whose  tenets  forbade  taking  part  in  war. 
The  number  of  these  cases,  however,  was  extremely  small,  not 
more  than  a  score  or  two  in  all,  and  when  these  men  were 
assigned  to  non-combatant  duty  there  was  little  difficulty.  In 
deed,  many  Friends  volunteered  for  general  military  service,  and 
there  was  an  active  propaganda  in  the  Society  for  doing  recon 
struction  work  in  France.  Despite  the  occasional  hardships  of 
conscientious  objectors  elsewhere,  the  policy  of  the  Government 
was  in  the  main  wise  and  salutary.  The  fact  that  criticisms 
came  from  both  sides,  those  on  the  one  hand  claiming  that  the 
rules  were  too  strict,  and  those  on  the  other  insisting  that  they 
were  not  strict  enough,  was  itself  pretty  good  evidence  that  the 
Government  had  adopted  the  golden  mean.  There  were  very  few 
cases  in  my  experience  where  conscientious  objections  were  used 
as  a  mere  pretence  for  avoiding  the  draft. 

The  fraudulent  claims  for  exemption  were  upon  other  grounds. 
One  man  who  wanted  to  get  off  because  his  wife  was  dependent, 
was  sued  by  her  for  divorce  on  account  of  inhuman  treatment. 
Another  man  got  from  a  neighbour  a  child  whom  he  adopted  and 
then  claimed  exemption  on  this  ground.  But  even  such  cases 
were  infrequent  and  usually  unsuccessful.  The  general  attitude 
of  the  registrants  was  creditable.  There  were  not  many  who 
were  eager  to  go,  but  the  feeling  was,  as  some  of  them  expressed 
it,  "When  my  turn  comes  and  my  country  needs  my  services,  I'm 
ready  and  I'll  do  my  duty."  Perhaps  that  is  a  better  augury  of 
enduring  courage  than  mere  enthusiasm  at  the  start.  Certainly 
these  men  did  credit  to  their  country  at  the  front. 

At  a  later  period  a  form  of  questionnaire  was  adopted,  by  which 
the  men  were  not  actually  discharged,  but  were  placed  in  different 
classes,  to  be  called  in  the  order  in  which  they  could  best  afford 
to  go,  without  inflicting  unnecessary  hardships  upon  dependents 
or  upon  the  industries  of  the  country.  The  questions  were  ad 
mirably  devised,  and  they  elicited  the  most  necessary  information 


THE  CONSCRIPTION  BOARD  203 

in  an  automatic  manner,  leaving  little  to  the  discretion  of  the 
boards. 

The  bulk  of  the  work  had  been  finished,  when  in  the  latter 
part  of  April,  1918,  I  asked  to  be  relieved  from  further  service 
on  account  of  illness. 


CHAPTER  XIII 

JOURNALISM  AND  LITERATURE 

"WHY  dost  thou  come  so  late?"  enquires  the  muse; 

"More  blithe  the  song  when  he  who  sings  is  young." 
But  I  protest,  "  'Twere  folly  thus  to  choose ; 

Is  not  the  ripe  fruit  sweetest  to  the  tongue?" 

— The  Muje  and  I. 

JOURNALISM 

I  have  dabbled  a  little  in  journalism.  In  college  I  was  one 
of  the  editors  of  the  Cap  and  Gown.  After  moving  to  Richmond 
in  1876  I  bought  an  interest  in  the  Palladium,  then  the  principal 
daily  in  the  district,  and  used  to  write  a  certain  share  of  the 
editorials,  but  differences  arose  between  my  partner  and  myself 
in  regard  to  the  political  policy  of  the  paper,  and  my  interest  was 
finally  sold  to  him. 

A  new  daily  which  arose  during  this  period,  the  Evening  Item, 
afterwards  became  for  a  time  the  leading  paper.  In  1901  I 
bought  a  half  interest  in  the  Item.  The  other  owner,  Mr.  J.  Ben- 
net  Gordon,  a  vigorous  writer,  continued  for  some  years  in  charge 
of  the  editorial  management,  though  I  sometimes  contributed. 
Afterwards  I  became  the  sole  owner  of  the  paper  and  edited  it 
myself.  The  Item  advocated  Progressive  principles  and  sup 
ported  the  policies  of  Theodore  Roosevelt. 

LITERARY   INTERESTS 

In  earlier  years  I  had  been  too  busy  with  other  things  to  give 
much  time  to  general  literature.  But  I  was  fond  of  this  kind 
of  work,  and  after  withdrawing  from  the  bar  there  was  more 
leisure  available.  The  next  place  but  one  to  our  home  was 
"Reeveston,"  the  home  of  Mrs.  Foulke's  parents  and  of  her 
brother,  Arthur  M.  Reeves.  He  was  a  man  of  scholarly  attain- 

204 


LIFE  OF  GOVERNOR  MORTON  205 

ments  who  had  made  a  special  study  of  Norse  literature  and  had 
collected  a  valuable  Icelandic  library  of  several  thousand  titles. 
He  spent  a  long  time  in  Copenhagen,  examining,  translating, 
annotating  and  phototyping  the  ancient  Norse  manuscripts  in  the 
Arna-Magnaean  Library  which  narrated  the  Icelandic  discovery 
of  America.  The  result  of  his  work  afterwards  appeared  in  a 
quarto  volume  published  by  the  Oxford  Press  entitled  "Wine- 
land  the  Good."  x 

My  intimacy  with  my  brother-in-law  was  a  close  one.  We  had 
travelled  much  together  in  Europe,  and  his  broad  scholarship,  his 
literary  tastes  and  his  unerring  sense  of  the  beautiful  had  made 
him  a  delightful  companion.  I  had  not,  up  to  the  time  of  his 
death  (in  1891)  published  any  literary  work,  except  a  monograph 
on  Russia.  But  this  association  and  our  reading  and  literary  dis 
cussions  stimulated  greatly  my  fondness  for  literature,  and  I  began 
to  write  books  on  a  variety  of  subjects — history,  biography,  criti 
cism,  fiction  and  poetry — scattering,  I  fear,  a  rather  limited 
amount  of  talent  over  too  wide  a  field.  Most  of  these  books  owe 
their  existence  to  accident  rather  than  to  any  systematic  design. 

The  first  of  these,  "Slav  and  Saxon,"  has  been  already  men 
tioned. 

LIFE  OF  GOVERNOR  MORTON 

When  in  the  Legislature  I  became  the  friend  of  Oliver  T. 
Morton,  the  youngest  son  of  Oliver  P.  Morton,  war  governor  of 
Indiana.  He  spoke  of  his  regret  that  there  had  been  no  adequate 
biography  of  his  father  and  asked  me  to  undertake  the  work. 
As  I  looked  into  the  subject  it  began  to  interest  me  greatly,  and 
I  decided  to  do  so.  Governor  Morton,  who  was  born  and 
reared  in  Wayne  County  and  practised  law  at  Centreville,  the 

1  On  his  death  his  library  passed  to  my  eldest  daughter  who  pro 
posed  to  follow  up  her  uncle's  researches  and  spent  a  year  in  private 
study  at  home  under  an  Icelandic  instructor.  She  afterwards  visited 
Iceland,  and  then  attended  lectures  at  the  Royal  University  of  Copen 
hagen,  studying  the  Norse  language.  Other  matters  intervened,  how 
ever,  to  prevent  the  prosecution  of  these  studies,  and  the  library,  after 
being  stored  for  years,  has  now  been  sent  by  her  as  a  gift  to  the  Uni 
versity  of  Louvain. 


206  JOURNALISM  AND  LITERATURE 

county  seat,  had  been  very  well  known  in  the  community  in 
which  I  lived  and  it  would  be  easy,  I  thought,  to  secure  the  mate 
rials  for  his  life.  The  task,  however,  proved  to  be  a  long  and 
arduous  one.  Very  little  of  his  correspondence  had  been  pre 
served,  and  the  materials  for  the  biography  had  to  be  collected 
largely  from  newspapers.  Morton  had  been  a  strong  partisan,  was 
ardently  supported  by  the  Republican  press  and  viciously  attacked 
in  the  Democratic  press,  but  by  comparing  all  that  appeared  on 
both  sides  it  was  not  hard  to  give  a  reasonably  impartial  estimate 
of  his  career  and  character.  I  was  engaged  in  this  work  inter 
mittently  for  more  than  ten  years.2 

Two  episodes  were  published  as  magazine  articles  before  the 
volumes    themselves   appeared,   namely,    "The   History   of   the 


2  I  had  the  benefit  of  much  valuable  criticism  from  those  who  were 
intimately  associated  with  Morton.  The  following  letter  from  W.  P. 
Fishback  one  of  the  leading  lawyers  of  Indianapolis,  who  had  been 
closely  connected  with  him  when  he  was  governor,  is  an  illustration. 

INDIANAPOLIS,  IND.,  Jan.  i8th  1896. 
DEAR  MR.  FOULKE: 

The  Bowen-Merrill  Co.  have  given  me  the  first  nineteen  chapters  of 
your  life  of  Morton,  and  I  have  read  them  with  great  interest.  It  is 
requested  that  I  make  "suggestions"  in  the  way  of  cutting  down  the 
bulk  of  the  narrative.  .  .  .  There  is  great  difficulty  to  me  in  this. 
The  theme  is  a  great  one  and  Morton's  stature  as  a  man  is  greatly 
increased  by  the  way  you  present  him.  He  is  thoroughly  living  in 
your  pages.  As  Emerson  said  of  Montaigne's  writing,  the  words  seem 
alive  and  the  feeling  is  that  they  would  bleed  if  you  cut  into  them. 
Now  will  the  interest  I  feel  be  shared  by  the  public  who  ought  to  read 
this  book?  It  covers  a  momentous  period  in  our  history,  and  the 
danger  and  temptation  in  writing  about  Morton  is  to  write  the  history 
of  his  time.  A  biography  will  not  bear  that  weight,  even  one  so 
interesting  as  this — such  is  my  fear.  I  have  accordingly  suggested 
that  men  like  Judge  Perkins,  John  Elder  and  John  Harkness  be  left 
out  except  when  it  is  necessary  to  name  them.  I  remember  all  the 
incidents  mentioned — the  oath  of  allegiance,  etc. 

Another  thing:  I  think  you  should  select  Morton's  great  speeches, 
such  as  that  at  Rushville,  and  give  them  in  full  and  condense  others. 
You  cannot  give  them  all  in  a  biography.  So  of  his  letters  and  other 
documents,  which  might  be  abridged. 

I  notice  by  the  erasures  that  some  one,  yourself  probably,  has  gone 


LIFE  OF  GOVERNOR  MORTON  207 

Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle,"  in  the  Atlantic  Monthly,  and  an 
account  of  a  secret  mission  to  Louis  Napoleon,  which  was 
entrusted  to  Morton  by  President  Johnson  when  Morton  went 
to  Europe.  The  mission  was  to  inform  the  Emperor  that  the 
French  troops  must  be  withdrawn  from  Mexico,  a  thing  which 
the  President  did  not  wish  to  communicate  through  diplomatic 
channels  lest  the  record  might  cause  the  French  Government 
unnecessary  embarrassment.  This  account  was  published  in  the 
Century.3 

After  the  book  was  published  I  kept  receiving  complaints  from 
the  relatives  of  different  persons  mentioned  in  it — that  I  had 
failed  to  do  justice  to  the  memorable  deeds  and  high  purposes 
of  their  respective  kinsmen.  I  suppose  this  is  inevitable  when  a 
writer  criticises  frankly  the  men  and  things  that  he  thinks  deserve 
it.  In  one  instance  I  was  satisfied  I  had  done  an  injustice  and 
directed  that  a  page  should  be  removed  and  another  substituted. 
But  in  all  other  cases  I  refused  to  make  any  change. 


over  the  manuscript  and  used  the  erasing  pencil  quite  freely,  and 
it  is  difficult  to  find  much  that  can  be  spared.  For  myself,  I  would 
keep  it  all,  but  you  have  to  think  of  the  large  public.  "Morton's 
Life"  ought  to  be  in  every  home  in  Indiana.  He  is  the  single  great 
historic  figure  of  our  State. 

Sincerely  yours, 

W.  P.  FISHBACK. 

3  It  was  doubted  at  the  time  by  many  and  was  denied  by  John 
Bigelow,  our  minister  to  Paris,  who,  however,  knew  nothing  about 
the  facts.  The  accuracy  of  the  account  appears  from  the  following 
letter  from  the  Hon.  R.  R.  Hitt,  who  was  Morton's  private  secretary 
when  he  was  senator,  and  who  was  afterwards  in  Congress  and  promi 
nent  on  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs.  The  letter  refers  to  a 
visit  made  by  Hitt  during  Morton's  last  illness  at  Indianapolis. 

May  18,  1897,  WASHINGTON,  D.  C. 
WILLIAM  DUDLEY  FOULKE,  ESQ., 

RICHMOND,  INDIANA. 
DEAR  SIR  : 

Your  article  handles  the  matter  accurately.  ...  I  stayed  with 
Morton  from  early  in  the  evening,  when  the  car  arrived  bringing  him 
from  Richmond,  until  into  the  morning  hours — two  or  three  o'clock — • 


208  JOURNALISM  AND  LITERATURE 


A  few  years  later  I  was  at  work  upon  another  book  whose 
origin  was  quite  casual.  I  had  been  travelling  in  Yucatan  and 
had  become  interested  in  the  ancient  Maya  civilisation,  whose 
remains  were  scattered  over  that  peninsula  in  the  ruins  of  cities, 
palaces  and  temples.  I  never  visited  a  country  which  affected 
me  more  profoundly,  and  the  ruins  were  all  the  more  interesting 
because  so  little  was  known  of  the  people  of  whose  civilisation 
they  are  almost  the  only  records. 

Some  time  after  my  return  it  occurred  to  me  that  my  impres 
sions  of  Yucatan  might  be  better  conveyed  in  a  romance  than 
by  a  mere  descriptive  article  and  that  Prescott's  account  of  cer 
tain  castaways,  captured  by  the  Mayas  about  the  time  of  the 
discovery  of  the  country,  some  of  whom  were  offered  to  the 
gods  in  sacrifice,  might  be  used  as  the  starting-point  for  a  story 
of  adventure,  which  should  embrace  many  of  the  scenes  of  the 


when  I  had  to  take  the  train  on  my  way  to  Paris.     I  never  saw  him 
again. 

My  recollection  goes  a  little  further  than  your  article.  As  to  John 
son's  conversation  with  Morton  being  his  exclusive  instructions — • 
Morton  had  every  reason  to  believe  Mr.  Seward  knew  nothing  of  the 
President's  instructions  to  him — the  impression  I  had  from  Morton 
was  that  Johnson  did  not  feel  satisfied  with  the  methods  of  Seward. 
I  am  perfectly  clear  in  my  recollection  that  the  whole  matter  was  by 
direction  of  the  President,  carried  on  without  any  knowledge  on  the 
part  of  Mr.  Bigelow. 

The  interview  with  the  Emperor  was,  as  I  understand,  soon  after 
meeting  with  Rothschild,  who  arranged  the  conference.  In  it  Mr. 
Morton,  for  the  President,  told  the  Emperor  plainly  the  state  of  national 
feeling  in  the  United  States  against  the  French  occupation  of  Mexico, 
and  that  the  inevitable,  final  result  must  be  evacuation ;  that  prolonging 
the  occupation  was  in  every  way  unadvisable  and  would  lead  to  deplora 
ble  conflict.  .  .  . 

The  Emperor  said  he  appreciated  all  this;  that  he  had  secured 
already  the  avowed  objects  of  the  expedition  for  his  subjects  and 
would  soon  take  steps  which  would  avoid  such  complications  with  us 
as  those  the  President  deplored. 

Very  truly  yours, 

R.  R.  HITT. 


"HISTORY  OF  THE  LANGOBARDS"  209 

ancient  Maya  civilisation.  The  plot  developed  as  I  wrote.  I 
am  not  conscious  that  any  part  of  it  was  taken  from  other  sources. 
The  legends  are  genuine  and  the  descriptions  of  the  country  are 
accurate,  but  outside  of  these  the  story  is  entirely  imaginary. 


"Protean  Papers"  was  "simply  a  piece  of  literary  fooling"  (as 
one  of  the  reviewers  said  to  me)  on  such  disconnected  subjects  as 
"Spellbinders,"  "Mountaineering  in  Mexico,"  "My  Dog,"  etc., 
with  passing  observations  on  "The  Economical  Acquisition  of 
Royal  Ancestry,"  "The  Frailties  of  Literary  Criticism"  and  "The 
Disadvantages  of  a  College  Education."  It  never  had  a  large 
circulation. 


In  1904,  while  living  in  Venice  for  some  months,  I  fell  so 
deeply  under  the  spell  of  that  wonderful  city  that  I  wanted  to 
write  its  history,  and  I  went  each  day  either  to  the  library  of 
St.  Mark's  or  to  the  Church  of  the  Frari  to  examine  some  early 
manuscripts  and  documents.  I  also  collected  a  large  number 
of  works  on  the  history  of  Venice  from  among  the  old  book-shops 
of  the  place  and  began  to  arrange  the  materials  for  my  first  chap 
ters.  These  related  to  the  settlements  on  the  islands  of  the  lagoon 
and  to  the  establishment  of  popular  institutions  during  the  dim 
and  uncertain  period  before  the  creation  of  the  dukedom  and  the 
oligarchy.  But  as  the  subject  gradually  unfolded,  and  the  enor 
mous  research  required  became  apparent,  it  was  evident  that  the 
rest  of  my  life  would  have  to  be  given  to  that  task  alone  if  it 
were  to  be  done  adequately,  and  that  the  work  even  then  would 
probably  be  left  incomplete.  I  therefore  gave  up  so  ambitious 
a  project  in  favour  of  something  more  modest.  I  had  come  across 
an  attractive  book  written  in  Latin  by  Paul  the  Deacon,  a  Bene 
dictine  monk,  during  the  reign  of  Charlemagne,  "The  History  of 
the  Langobards."  In  his  garrulous  story-telling  he  seemed  to  me 
a  sort  of  mediaeval  Herodotus.  His  history  had  never  been  done 
into  English,  and  it  seemed  worth  while  to  translate  it  with  ex 
planatory  notes  and  a  biography  of  the  author.  The  book  was 


210  JOURNALISM  AND  LITERATURE 

published  in  1916  in  a  historical  series  issued  by  the  University 
of  Pennsylvania.  Quite  apart  from  its  value  as  a  source  of 
mediaeval  history,  Paul's  quaint  and  simple  narrative  has  a  charm 
of  its  own  and  is  fitted  for  the  entertainment  of  the  general  reader 
as  well  as  of  the  student. 


A  variety  of  incidents  which  occurred  in  my  boyhood,  illus 
trative  of  the  customs  and  modes  of  thought  of  the  Society  of 
Friends,  seemed  worth  preserving,  and  I  did  this  in  a  novel,  cov 
ering  a  period  just  before  and  including  the  Civil  War,  when  the 
peace  principles  of  the  Society  came  into  conflict  with  the  patriotic 
feelings  aroused  by  that  struggle.  Some  of  the  stirring  scenes  of 
this  war  were  brought  into  the  chapters  of  the  story.  In  this 
way  was  written  "The  Quaker  Boy,  a  Tale  of  the  Outgoing  Gen 
eration  as  Chronicled  in  the  Memoirs  of  Robert  Barclay  Dilling- 
ham."  This  was  first  published  anonymously  and  then  appeared 
in  a  second  edition  in  1911,  under  the  title  of  "Dorothy  Day." 


I  once  determined,  instead  of  reading  any  new  work  of  fiction, 
to  review  the  masterpieces  I  had  most  enjoyed  and  see  what 
changes  time  had  made  in  my  impressions  of  them.  Choosing 
some  forty  of  the  most  celebrated  authors,  from  Rabelais  and 
Cervantes  down  to  Tolstoi  and  Stevenson,  and  omitting  only  those 
who  were  still  living,  I  selected  for  criticism  one  story  by  each, 
which  should  represent  his  best  work.  These  were  read  one 
after  another  in  the  shortest  time  possible  so  as  to  get  a  compre 
hensive  notion  of  the  whole.  Thus  the  general  perspective  and 
the  comparative  merits  and  faults  of  each  work  might  anpear  more 
clearly  than  in  any  other  way.  The  observations  made  upon 
this  second  reading  were  thrown  together  in  a  book  entitled,  "The 
Masterpieces  of  the  Masters  of  Fiction,"  published  in  1912. 

"FIGHTING  THE  SPOILSMEN" 

There  was  one  book,  however,  whose  origin  was  not  accidental 
but  represented  half  a  lifetime  of  effort,  not  in  the  writing,  but  in 


POETRY,  211 

doing  and  observing  the  things  described.  This  was  "Fighting 
the  Spoilsmen."  It  consisted  mainly  of  reminiscences  of  the  Civil 
Service  Reform  movement  after  the  passage  of  the  Pendleton  Act 
of  1883.  The  history  of  this  reform  in  England  had  been  given 
in  Dorman  B.  Eaton's  standard  work  on  the  Civil  Service  in  Great 
Britain;  the  pioneer  efforts  in  America  were  recorded  in  the  report 
of  Thomas  Allen  Jenckes  and  in  the  speeches  and  writings  of 
George  William  Curtis  and  Carl  Schurz.  I  continued  the  story 
down  to  the  entrance  of  America  into  the  World  War.  I  had 
been  in  the  thick  of  the  fight  with  Curtis,  Schurz  and  Eaton  and 
had  been  in  charge  of  many  investigations  conducted  by  the 
National  Civil  Service  Reform  League.  I  was  also  a  co-worker 
in  this  movement  with  Theodore  Roosevelt,  who  afterwards  ap 
pointed  me  to  a  place  on  the  Civil  Service  Commission.  In  this 
volume  I  detailed  the  progress  of  the  reform  and  the  incidents 
of  our  struggles  with  the  spoilsmongers  so  far  as  these  had  come 
under  my  personal  observation. 

POETRY 

Except  for  a  few  rhymes  in  college,  it  was  not  until  I  was 
sixty  that  I  gave  any  attention  to  the  writing  of  verse.  In  1908, 
while  taking  a  course  of  baths  at  Nauheim,  Germany,  and  hav 
ing  plenty  of  leisure,  I  employed  it  turning  into  verse  my  romance 
of  "Maya,"  written  about  eight  years  before.  I  first  intended  to 
write  a  libretto,  but  the  work  expanded  quite  beyond  the  limits 
proper  for  such  a  production  and  developed  into  "Maya,  a  Lyrical 
Drama,"  which  was  published  in  1911.  It  is  not,  however, 
adapted  to  ordinary  dramatic  representation. 

In  1913  I  was  abroad  again  and  was  quite  ill.  I  had  purchased 
a  volume  of  Petrarch's  poems  in  Italian,  and  during  the  following 
months  at  Rome,  Lugano,  Nauheim  and  Grindelwald,  in  the  long 
periods  when  I  was  confined  to  my  room  and  often  to  my  bed, 
I  amused  myself  by  reading  and  re-reading  these  poems  and  turn 
ing  the  sonnets  into  English  sonnets,  and  the  odes,  sestines  and 
madrigals  into  corresponding  English  rhymes.  The  game  was  an 
attractive  one  and  whiled  away  many  tedious  hours.  It  is  astonish 
ing  to  find  with  what  facility  such  work  can  be  done  when  you  get 


212  JOURNALISM  AND  LITERATURE 

into  the  swing  of  it,  and  I  found  myself  able  to  transfer  at  least  a 
part  of  the  wonderful  beauty  of  these  poems  into  the  English 
tongue.  This  book  was  published  by  the  Oxford  University  Press 
in  the  following  year,  and  the  reviews  were  so  favourable  that  I 
was  tempted  to  go  further  and  write  some  short  poems  of  my 
own.  Many  of  these  appeared  in  the  Indianapolis  Star  and  after 
wards  in  "Lyrics  of  War  and  Peace,"  published  in  1916  in  Eng 
land  by  the  Oxford  Press  and  in  America  by  the  Bobbs-Merrill 
Company  of  Indianapolis. 

Four  years  later  and  after  the  conclusion  of  the  war  I  issued 
another  volume  of  much  the  same  general  character,  entitled 
"To-day  and  Yesterday."  This  was  published  in  1920,  also  by 
the  Oxford  University  Press.  In  these  verses  there  will  be  found 
little  to  appeal  to  the  admirers  of  the  "new  poetry"  as  it  is 
called.  The  idea  that  there  must  be  developed  something  radi 
cally  different  in  the  poetry  of  the  future  from  that  of  the  past 
seems  to  me  entirely  fanciful.  Who  was  it  said  of  a  certain 
work  that  it  contained  some  new  things  and  some  good  things, 
but  the  things  that  were  new  were  not  good  and  the  things  that 
were  good  were  not  new?  Something  like  this  could  well  be  said 
of  much  of  this  "Poetry  of  the  Future." 

Indeed,  Indiana  writers  in  general  have  not  followed  the  ex 
cesses  which  became  among  certain  circles  elsewhere  the  fashion 
of  the  twentieth  century.  There  was  a  homespun  quality  in  story 
and  in  poem,  a  rustic  but  sharp  thrust  in  cartoon  and  jest,  which 
made  pose  unwelcome  and  sincerity  popular.  "New  Art,"  whether 
it  took  the  form  of  wild  orchestration,  futurist  pictures,  or  imagist 
poetry,  made  little  headway,  and  while  new  fashions  are  sure 
to  have  some  followers  everywhere,  Indiana  taste  has,  up  to  the 
present  time,  instinctively  preferred  the  homely  appeal  of  Riley's 
poetry  to  the  extravagances  of  the  futurists.  Riley  himself  had 
no  patience  with  the  pretensions  of  the  new  school. 


CHAPTER  XIV 

PERSONALIA 

Two  kinds  of  sorrows  vex  our  lives  with  care, 

Things  that  we  can,  and  things  we  can  not  mend ; 
If  we  can  change  them,  why  should  we  despair? 

And  if  not,  why  our  days  in  torment  spend? 
For  beauty  is  around  us  everywhere, 

In  the  blue  sky  or  cloud,  at  noon  or  night, 
And  glory  fills  the  heavens,  and  earth  is  fair 

Whether  its  mantle  be  of  green  or  white. 
Whence  cometh  joy?    On  many  a  pampered  son 

Life  has  bestowed  her  richest  gifts  in  vain, 
While  from  some  crippled,  poor,  neglected  one 

Come  songs  of  cheer  and  smiles  that  banish  pain. 
The  wellspring  is  within,  to  curse  or  bless ; 
In  our  own  hearts  is  grief  or  happiness. 

— Happiness. 
See  infra,  p.  223. 

WHIMS   AND  FANCIES 

On  one  occasion,  at  a  summer  hotel  (I  think  it  was  at  the 
Delaware  Water  Gap),  there  was  a  grey-haired  German  gentle 
man  who  looked  like  a  professor  and  who  carried  with  him, 
wherever  he  went,  a  small  net,  such  as  children  use  for  catching 
butterflies.  And  this  indeed  it  was,  and  he  carried  it  for  just 
that  purpose,  for  wherever  he  might  happen  to  be,  whether  stroll 
ing  among  the  hills  or  sitting  upon  the  veranda  of  the  hotel, 
as  soon  as  he  spied  one  of  these  gay  summer  beauties  he  would 
chase  it  with  boyish  eagerness.  Once  he  sprawled  upon  the  floor 
of  our  general  assembly  room  in  his  mad  pursuit  of  a  particu 
larly  valuable  variety  called  "The  Queen  of  the  Night."  I  asked 
if  he  were  a  naturalist,  and  if  these  efforts  were  in  behalf  of 
science.  "Nein,"  he  answered  (for  he  had  come  to  America  to 
chase  butterflies  without  the  knowledge  of  a  word  of  English). 
"Nein,  es  ist  nur  Passion" 

The  other  guests  were  sympathetic,  and  we  all  rallied  to  his 
support  in  his  wild  scrambles  after  the  bright- winged  flutter ers. 

213 


214  PERSONALIA 

This  butterfly  madness  is  only  an  illustration  of  a  weakness 
common  to  us  all.  Who  is  there  that  has  not  his  "Passion"?  We 
may  be  shamefaced  about  it  and  keep  it  from  the  knowledge  of 
men,  but  some  such  folly  lies  hidden  in  the  recesses  of  every 
heart. 

Now  my  "Passion"  was  for  mountains.  I  have  seldom  gone 
to  any  new  place  for  a  summer's  outing  without  wondering  what 
mountains  there  might  be  in  the  neighbourhood,  how  high  they 
were  and  whether  they  were  worth  a  climb.  In  comparing  the 
various  ranges  and  peaks,  mere  height  had  an  indefinable  charm  for 
me.  Thus  the  Irish  and  Scotch  mountains,  with  the  beautiful  land 
scapes  around  them,  set  as  delicately  as  pictures  in  enamel,  were 
not  as  attractive  as  the  Rockies  or  the  Alps,  while  the  seventeen 
thousand  feet  of  Popocatepetl  was  long  the  Mecca  of  my  dreams, 
and  when  that  had  been  scaled,  there  came  a  longing  for  Chim- 
borazo  or  Cotopaxi  or  the  Golden  Throne.  I  studied  the  tables 
of  comparative  elevations  in  the  geographies  with  an  interest  like 
that  which  a  politician  feels  in  figuring  out  electoral  majorities, 
and  when  travelling,  no  matter  where,  if  there  were  a  mountain 
near  at  hand,  I  would  start  from  the  inn  the  very  first  moment 
possible  for  a  scramble  to  its  summit.  Talk  not  of  yachting  or 
motoring,  nor  of  incredible  catches  of  great  fish;  show  me  no 
trophies  of  big  game;  speak  not  of  golf,  that  unnecessary  stimu 
lant  to  profanity!  What  are  such  things  to  the  lover  of  the 
mountain? 

True,  there  was  some  sport  in  canoeing,  winding  in  and  out 
through  streams  and  inlets  and  enjoying  the  silent  strokes  of  the 
paddle  and  the  smooth  gliding  of  the  light  craft  over  the  clear 
still  water;  and  there  was  another  delightful  exercise — a  long 
distance  swim  of  a  mile  or  more  along  the  coast,  when  you  rise 
and  fall  with  the  big  swells,  conscious  that  you  can  place  your 
body  in  any  position  and  glide  quietly  through  the  cool  water. 
Hunting  was  not  such  good  fun,  but  the  reason  was  not  hard  to 
find.  I  used  to  go  on  occasional  expeditions  to  English  Lake  in 
northern  Indiana,  and  one  day,  after  my  pusher  had  laid  out  for 
me  a  fine  decoy  and  had  made  an  elaborate  blind  of  bushes  where 
I  was  securely  hidden,  flocks  of  wild  ducks  swept  across  in  front 
of  me,  and  during  the  day  I  brought  down  eight  or  ten  of  them. 


WHIMS  AND  FANCIES  215 

This  I  thought  was  doing  pretty  well,  though  I  had  missed  many 
more  than  I  had  shot.  But  as  the  pusher  rowed  me  back  to  the 
clubhouse  he  said  in  discouraged  tones,  "I  kin  take  a  man  where 
ducks  is,  but  I  kain't  make  him  hit  them  ducks."  I  have  done 
little  hunting  since. 

I  was  not  much  better  with  the  rod  than  with  the  gun.  My 
companions  once  declared  that  after  I  had  got  a  salmon  on  the 
hook  I  proceeded  to  march  down  the  stream  with  the  rod  over 
my  shoulder  and  the  fish  tugging  behind  until  he  broke  the  line. 

A  stroll  through  the  woods  or  along  the  beach  with  some  con 
genial  soul  was  quite  as  much  sport  as  hunting  or  fishing.  The 
family  used  to  spend  the  summer  at  Watch  Hill,  where  there  was 
always  good  company.  The  most  delightful  of  all  companions 
was  David  A.  Wells,  the  political  economist.  He  and  I  used  to 
walk  regularly  a  mile  or  two  along  the  shore  to  a  wreck  that  had 
been  tossed  up  from  the  sea,  and  we  devoted  ourselves  assiduously 
to  an  attempt  to  burn  it.  One  day  we  would  kindle  a  fire  which 
would  destroy  some  small  part  of  it  and  then  go  out.  Next  day 
we  would  kindle  another  and  so  all  through  the  summer,  but 
when  we  left  in  the  fall  it  was  still  mostly  unconsumed.  But  the 
problems  of  government  we  discussed  on  our  way  to  and  from 
the  wreck  and  the  wealth  of  illustration  exhibited  by  this  eminent 
man  in  the  development  of  his  economic  theories — these  things 
are  a  joy  in  the  remembrance. 

It  was  at  Watch  Hill  that  I  learned  to  ride  a  bicycle.  Mr. 
William  P.  Anderson  had  a  cottage  there  and  was  taking  lessons 
from  a  certain  cadaverous  looking  "professor"  at  Stonington,  and 
he  asked  me  to  join  him.  The  scene  of  our  instruction  was  a 
little  triangular  plot  of  land  bounded  by  three  roads,  in  front 
of  the  railway  station.  The  "professor"  would  run  along  with  us, 
hold  us  on  for  a  few  moments  and  then  leave  us  to  our  fate, 
and  the  accuracy  with  which  we  tumbled  into  the  ditch  at  the 
side  of  the  road  was  past  belief.  When  his  instruction  began 
there  was  generally  nobody  near,  but  as  we  continued,  the  pas 
sengers  to  and  from  the  different  trains  stopped  to  see  the  fun, 
and  the  temptation  to  stay  was  irresistible.  Some  of  them  would 
miss  their  trains  rather  than  miss  such  sport,  and  before  the 
"lesson"  ended  there  was  a  formidable  crowd  gathered  around  us 


216  PERSONALIA 

which  broke  every  now  and  then  into  uproarious  laughter  at  our 
discomfiture.  Never  were  two  such  awkward  men  before,  but 
we  kept  at  it  and  when  the  "course"  was  completed  we  had 
learned  to  ride. 

Now  with  advancing  years  I  have  had  to  give  up  many  of  the 
forms  of  exercise  in  which  I  once  delighted.  I  can  no  longer  climb 
a  very  high  mountain,  nor  swim  any  great  distance.  Horseback 
riding,  in  which  I  was  at  one  time  so  expert  that  I  could  ride 
standing  on  the  horse's  back,  now  has  to  be  of  the  tamest  variety 
with  a  perfectly  tractable  and  well-gaited  animal;  no  racing,  nor 
jumping,  nor  adventure  of  any  sort.  Tennis  had  to  be  eschewed 
altogether,  and  golf  was  abandoned  some  time  ago.  As  Joseph 
Choate  said,  ''When  we  grow  old  we  have  to  jettison  one  thing 
after  another  in  our  cargo  in  order  to  save  what  remains." 

The  main  thing  is  to  abandon  these  things  without  regret. 
There  is  still  a  great  deal  left.  The  woods  are  as  green,  the 
streams  as  sparkling  and  the  sunsets  as  bright  as  ever,  and  the 
old  man  can  enjoy  these  even  better  in  later  years  than  in  the 
flush  of  youth  or  prime  of  manhood  when  he  has  so  much  else  to 
claim  his  attention.  The  venerable  Mark  Hopkins  of  Williams 
College  once  said  to  me  that  the  happiest  time  of  his  life  was 
his  old  age,  and  in  the  absence  of  positive  distress  from  sickness 
or  other  cause  it  ought  to  be  so  with  all.  The  twilight  is  more 
tranquil  and  filled  with  greater  charm  than  the  day. 

Some  of  the  supposed  advantages  of  mature  years,  however, 
seem  to  me  rather  the  reverse.  Old  age,  it  is  said,  enjoys  the 
benefits  of  experience.  These  are  indeed  often  great,  yet  in  one 
thing  experience  is  not  a  benefit  but  a  drawback.  The  young 
man  imagines  that  he  is  completely  the  master  of  his  own  will,  that 
he  can  form  any  new  habit  or  break  off  any  old  one  and  so 
control  his  desires  and  his  conduct  as  to  accomplish  (so  far  as 
it  depends  on  his  own  action)  anything  he  sets  out  to  do.  But 
the  years  take  away  a  good  deal  of  this  confidence.  The  old  man  is 
not  so  certain.  The  memory  of  the  times  when  he  has  not  been 
able  to  say  the  thing  he  meant  to  say  or  to  do  the  thing  he  meant 
to  do  is  sure  to  subtract  something  from  that  reliance  upon  him 
self  which  is  the  groundwork  of  the  highest  success  in  human 
endeavour. 


SOME  BUSINESS  EXPERIENCES  217 

SOME  BUSINESS   EXPERIENCES 

My  father's  profession  as  a  teacher  and  a  minister  of  the 
Society  of  Friends  had  removed  him  from  any  close  connection 
with  the  financial  world.  He  had,  however,  been  fortunate  in 
his  investments.  He  once  said  to  me,  "My  son,  I  buy  these  securi 
ties  when  they  are  low.  I  hold  them  till  they  rise  in  value  and 
then  I  sell  them."  How  simple! 

Thus  it  was  that  my  business  training  was  of  the  most  rudi 
mentary  character.  A  few  months  in  a  commercial  college  was 
all  the  instruction  I  ever  received.  I  never  considered  myself  a 
good  business  man,  having  had  just  about  judgment  enough 
to  hold  on  to  what  I  had  and  what  was  entrusted  to  me,  without 
allowing  serious  impairment  and  with  moderate  returns  upon 
investments. 

Once  in  my  early  law  practice  in  New  York  I  was  induced  to 
take  certain  parcels  of  real  estate  for  a  fee,  and  from  that  circum 
stance  began  a  series  of  trades  in  lots,  farms,  dwellings,  stocks  of 
hardware,  etc.,  lasting  a  dozen  years,  in  which,  after  endless 
trouble,  great  loss  of  time  and  tiresome  complexities,  I  came  out 
of  the  hole  in  about  the  same  condition  that  I  went  in  and  very 
grateful  for  that. 

There  is  one  incident  in  my  business  experience  which  illus 
trates  the  benevolent  care  which  the  Tammany  machine  in  New 
York  City  used  to  exercise  over  the  people  of  that  metropolis. 
I  was  the  owner  of  a  number  of  buildings  in  Chatham  Street  (now 
Park  Row).  I  had  leased  one  of  these  to  a  man  named  Bam- 
berger,  who  was  prominent  in  Tammany  Hall,  and  he  had  sublet 
it  to  another  tenant.  A  fire  broke  out  and  destroyed  part  of  the 
roof.  The  subtenant  refused  to  leave  the  premises,  although  he 
paid  no  rent.  I  directed  my  agent  to  evict  him,  but  when  the 
case  was  brought  up  for  trial,  five  witnesses  were  there  prepared 
to  testify  that  they  had  seen  the  rent  paid — an  absolute  false 
hood.  Fearing  he  would  be  beaten  in  the  suit,  my  agent  dis 
missed  the  case  without  prejudice  to  its  renewal,  and  wrote  me 
concerning  the  facts. 

I  happened  to  be  in  New  York  a  few  days  after  this,  and  he 
told  me  that  Bamberger,  a  politician  who  stood  well  with  the  city 


218  PERSONALIA 

authorities,  had  asked  the  Department  of  Buildings  for  a  survey 
of  the  premises  to  ascertain  whether  they  were  not  dangerous; 
that  the  first  report  was  that  they  were  entirely  safe  (which  was 
the  fact),  but  this  not  being  what  Bamberger  wanted  he  secured 
a  resurvey.  According  to  this  the  building  was  declared  danger 
ous  and  an  order  was  issued  that  it  be  torn  down  immediately. 
I  had  no  objection,  for  I  wanted  to  rebuild.  It  was  suggested 
that  I  see  the  Commissioner  of  Buildings.  I  went  to  his  office 
and  saw  one  of  his  subordinates,  who  told  me  of  the  special  re- 
survey  and  the  new  order;  he  then  offered  to  introduce  me  to 
his  principal,  but  added,  "Don't  say  anything  to  him  of  the  con 
sideration  for  this  thing." 

I  answered,  "Consideration?    What  do  you  mean?" 

He  turned  to  me  in  astonishment  and  said,  "Why,  aren't  you 
the  man  we  are  doing  this  for?" 

I  told  him  I  was  the  owner,  but  had  not  asked  for  the  survey 
and  knew  nothing  about  any  consideration.  He  seemed  dumb 
founded,  and  I  walked  away.  I  directed  my  agent  to  begin  again 
the  proceedings  to  evict.  The  subtenant,  who  by  this  time  had 
lost  his  nerve,  allowed  the  case  to  go  by  default,  and  I  secured 
possession.  Here  was  a  building  quite  safe,  but  which  was 
ordered  destroyed  as  dangerous  for  the  sole  purpose  of  ejecting 
a  subtenant  as  a  favour  to  a  political  friend  and  for  a  suitable 
"consideration!" 

It  has  been  a  rule  of  the  family  to  talk  freely  about  all  our 
business  affairs  and  investments.  A  man's  family,  the  women 
as  well  as  the  men,  ought  to  have  knowledge  of  such  things  and 
should  be  encouraged  to  take  an  interest  in  his  affairs.  Many  a 
wife  would  be  more  careful  if  she  knew  exactly  how  matters 
stood,  and  many  a  man  could  profit  from  the  counsels  of  those 
at  home  who  have  an  interest  as  great  as  his  own  in  his  pros 
perity.  I  once  had  an  interesting  talk  with  Jules  Cambon,  former 
ambassador  of  France  at  Washington,  on  this  subject.  "Ameri 
can  husbands,"  he  said,  "are  very  kind  to  their  wives,  give  them 
every  luxury  possible  and  humour  them  in  every  way,  but  do  not 
make  them  their  confidants.  A  woman  will  often  know  nothing 
of  her  husband's  business.  A  French  wife,  on  the  other  hand,  is 
her  husband's  partner,  helps  him  all  she  can,  keeps  his  books, 


THE  SOCIETY  OF  FRIENDS  219 

perhaps  tends  his  store  or  manages  his  investments.  She  is  inter 
ested  in  all  he  does  and  tries  in  every  way  to  promote  his  suc 
cess.  That  is  much  better  for  both  of  them." 


THE   SOCIETY   OF    FRIENDS 

I  was,  as  we  have  seen,  a  "birthright  member"  of  the  Hicksite 
branch  of  the  Society  of  Friends,  whose  doctrine  was  that  each 
man  should  follow  his  own  convictions  of  duty  as  his  supreme 
guide  of  conduct.  But  I  was  often  puzzled  by  the  peculiar  way 
in  which  a  man's  conscience  acts.  Not  only  is  it  true  that  from 
education,  prejudice  and  surroundings  one  man  believes  to  be 
a  virtuous  deed  that  which  another  considers  a  sin,  but  even  where 
there  is  no  doubt  as  to  the  quality  of  the  act,  our  moral  con 
sciousness  is  affected  by  things  which  have  no  relation  to  guilt 
or  innocence.  The  remorse  one  suffers  for  wrongdoing  bears  no 
proportion  to  actual  guilt.  If  by  our  fault,  death  or  some  other 
disastrous  consequences  ensue  to  another,  we  reproach  ourselves 
bitterly,  whereas  if  no  calamity  occurs  we  never  think  of  the 
matter  again.  A  sinful  act,  if  it  remain  unknown,  will  often  pass 
with  but  little  regret,  but  if  discovery  follow  we  do  not  cease 
to  reproach  ourselves.  The  degree  of  remorse  is  certainly  an  un 
reliable  test  of  the  degree  of  guilt.  Our  own  compunctions  are 
like  the  law  which  punishes  murder  with  death,  yet  gives  the 
attempt  at  murder  only  a  few  years'  imprisonment,  although  the 
failure  to  kill  did  not  in  the  least  affect  the  moral  quality  of 
the  act.  If  this  moral  sense  then  is  so  unreliable,  how  far  ought 
we  trust  to  it?  I  could  not  tell. 

So  I  became  a  good  deal  of  an  agnostic  in  respect  to  this 
"inner  light"  as  well  as  other  things,  and  after  the  outbreak 
of  the  World  War  I  found  my  views  so  radically  different  from 
those  of  Friends  in  respect  to  non-resistance  that  I  determined 
to  sever  my  connection  with  the  Society  and  therefore  resigned. 

And  yet  there  were  many  of  the  principles  of  the  Society  with 
which  I  fully  agreed.  Friends  have  always  been  devoted  to  hu 
man  liberty,  both  physical  and  spiritual,  and  took  an  active  part 
in  the  movement  to  free  the  slaves;  they  have  been  thoroughly 
democratic,  recognising  no  special  order  of  priesthood,  nor  rank  of 


220  PERSONALIA 

any  kind,  and  giving  to  women  equal  rights  with  men;  they  have 
always  stood  for  temperance  and  sobriety  in  daily  life  and  for 
honesty  in  their  dealings  with  others;  they  have  always  urged 
plainness  of  speech,  behaviour  and  apparel.  This  for  a  long 
time  was  shown  in  the  Quaker  garb  and  broadbrim  and  the  "thee 
and  thou,"  now  largely  discarded,  but  its  essential  features — 
freedom  from  ostentation  and  the  candid  expression  of  honest  con 
viction — are  still  among  the  things  they  inculcate.  And  in  connec 
tion  with  their  principles  of  non-resistance,  with  which  I  could 
not  agree,  they  always  tried  to  teach  that  love  of  justice  and  fair 
play  which  will  in  most  cases  remove  the  causes  for  strife.  Al 
though  Friends  have  now  discarded  some  of  the  peculiarities 
which  distinguished  them  and  have  become  in  outward  appear 
ance  more  like  the  "world's  people,"  yet  on  the  other  hand  the 
world  itself  has,  in  the  foregoing  matters,  become  more  like  the 
Quakers. 

The  Society  of  Friends  has  represented  an  important  phase  in 
the  development  of  the  English-speaking  peoples.  The  organisa 
tion  will  last  as  long  as  the  world  has  need  for  it.  But  whether 
its  existence  be  permanent  or  whether  the  work  shall  be  carried 
on  by  other  hands,  its  record  will  always  be  one  of  the  creditable 
pages  in  history. 

I  still  feel  a  subtle  sympathy  with  many  of  its  earlier  ways 
which  have  fallen  into  disuse,  and  cherish  precious  recollections 
of  old-fashioned  Friends,  and  old  shingle  meeting-houses  shaded 
by  big  trees,  with  plain,  unpainted  benches  inside  (the  men's  side 
separated  from  the  women's  side  by  shutters),  and  where  perhaps 
the  only  sounds  heard  from  the  time  you  entered  till  the  time  you 
left  were  the  songs  of  the  birds  coming  in  through  the  open 
windows. 

It  is  the  quiet  kind  of  religion  which  sinks  deepest  into  the  heart, 
the  kind  which  shines  in  the  pale  and  modest  faces  of  Sisters  of 
Charity  and  Mercy  on  their  visits  to  the  sick  and  poor;  the  kind 
that  guides  the  life  of  your  plain  neighbour  and  old  friend  who 
perhaps  never  said  a  word  to  you  about  salvation,  yet  who  always 
lent  a  helping  hand  in  time  of  need  and  whose  example  was  a 
shining  light;  the  sort  of  faith  which  beams  from  the  clear, 
earnest  eyes  of  some  little  Quaker  lady  who  would  not  "speak  in 


RETROSPECT  221 

meeting"  for  the  world,  but  whose  very  presence  is  an  inspiration 
to  those  around  her.  Fortunate  is  the  man  whose  boyhood  has 
been  watched  by  eyes  like  these. 


RETROSPECT 

Looking  back  from  the  age  of  seventy  years  and  more  upon 
the  various  opinions,  political,  social  and  religious,  which  I  held 
in  earlier  times,  I  find  that  I  have  changed  very  few  of  them. 
The  abhorrence  of  human  slavery  inculcated  in  childhood,  when 
our  house  was  a  station  of  the  underground  railway,  has  remained 
through  life. 

My  adherence  to  the  Republican  Party  in  early  manhood  still 
seems  to  me  justified  by  what  that  party  had  done,  and  my  tem 
porary  alienation  from  it,  in  the  support  of  Cleveland,  still  appears 
reasonable  and  right. 

In  my  faith  in  Theodore  Roosevelt  I  have  seen  no  ground 
for  change  and  continue  to  regard  it  as  a  supreme  achievement 
that  I  was  able  to  win  and  to  keep  the  warm  and  abiding  friend 
ship  of  this  great  man.  His  sudden  death  seemed  like  an  eclipse 
darkening  the  world,  and  when,  on  the  following  day,  returning 
from  Indianapolis,  I  saw  upon  my  table  two  short  notes,  just 
received,  signed  with  the  dear  familiar  hand  that  could  then 
write  no  more,  it  seemed  that  much  of  that  which  made  life  valua 
ble  had  passed  away. 

I  still  believe  in  the  public  measures  espoused  at  an  early 
period;  some  of  them  are  now  accomplished  facts,  others  are  on 
the  way  to  fulfilment;  woman  suffrage,  civil  service  reform, 
proportional  representation,  the  manager  form  of  city  government, 
an  international  court  of  justice,  and  in  some  shape  a  league  of 
nations — these  still  seem  to  me  to  have  been  worthy  of  support. 
As  to  the  need  of  preparing  to  take  our  part  in  the  great  war,  it 
must  now  be  clear  to  all  that  the  warnings  vainly  sounded  during 
the  first  two  years  of  the  struggle  were  only  too  well  justified 
by  the  event. 

On  two  subjects  I  was  certainly  mistaken.  In  "Slav  and 
Saxon"  I  expressed  the  opinion  that  the  growth  and  spread  of 
the  Russian  autocracy  was  the  greatest  menace  to  liberal  insti- 


222  PERSONALIA 

tutions.  It  did  not  turn  out  that  way.  It  was  Germany 
who  was  the  most  dangerous  aspirant  for  universal  dominion. 
The  sudden  collapse  of  the  Russian  autocracy  by  revolution  has 
changed  the  character  of  the  Muscovite  menace,  and  to-day  the 
greatest  danger  in  that  quarter  is  from  the  propagation  of  the 
communist  doctrines  so  suddenly  adopted. 

There  is  another  subject  upon  which  my  views  have  changed. 
In  earlier  life  I  was  a  strong  individualist,  a  believer  in  the  doc 
trines  of  Herbert  Spencer  and  John  Stuart  Mill.  But  society  has 
been  drifting  the  other  way.  Government  has  gradually  and 
inevitably  assumed  greater  powers  everywhere,  supplanting  and 
eliminating  in  measure  the  independent  action  of  the  individual 
in  favour  of  a  larger  collectivism.  I  have  realised  this  necessity 
and  believe  that  it  may  extend  still  further  than  at  present,  but 
that  it  should  never  reach  the  ideal  of  a  socialistic  state  in  which 
the  main  incentives  to  industry  would  be  stifled. 


PHILOSOPHY    OF    LIFE 

And  at  the  end  of  these  seventy  years,  what  is  the  conclusion 
as  to  a  true  philosophy  of  life?  In  my  early  youth  metaphysics 
were  very  alluring,  but  in  college  all  fondness  for  these  was  shaken 
by  the  study  of  Hickok's  Empirical  Psychology,  "The  Mind  as 
Revealed  in  Consciousness,"  for  the  learned  author  described  the 
mind  with  various  compartments  and  functions  which  I  could  not 
identify;  they  must  have  been  revealed  to  the  consciousness  of 
somebody  else.  I  felt  at  first  disgusted  that  I  was  lacking  in  the 
faculty  of  knowing  my  own  mind,  but  finally  came  to  believe 
that  much  of  the  author's  philosophy  was  the  product  of  his 
imagination. 

Then  Dr.  Barnard's  "Ontological  Argument,"  in  his  lectures 
on  the  "Evidences  of  Natural  and  Revealed  Religion,"  seemed  so 
unsubstantial  that  I  came  to  the  conclusion  that  this  kind  of 
philosophy  did  not  lead  anywhere.  I  have  retained  that  convic 
tion  and  eschewed  all  abstract  metaphysics  down  to  this  day. 

Among  Von  ScheffePs  charming  descriptions  of  mediaeval  scenes 
in  "Ekkehard"  is  one  where  two  Hunnish  chiefs,  Hornebog  and 
Ellak,  with  their  horde  of  barbarians,  invade  the  cloister  of 


PHILOSOPHY  OF  LIFE  223 

St.  Callus  and  come  upon  an  illuminated  manuscript.  Hornebog 
lifts  it  on  the  point  of  his  sword  and  asks  Ellak  what  it  is.  Ellak 
tells  him  it  is  the  work  of  one  Boethius  on  the  "Consolations  of 
Philosophy." 

"Philosophy?"  asks  Hornebog.  "What  kind  of  a  consolation  is 
that?" 

"It  isn't  a  pretty  woman  nor  good  drink.  It's  hard  to  describe 
in  Hunnish.  If  a  man  does  not  know  why  he  is  in  the  world 
and  turns  himself  upside  down  to  find  out,  that  is  what  they  call 
philosophy  in  this  western  country.  The  man  who  comforted 
himself  this  way  in  the  tower  at  Pavia  was  clubbed  to  death." 

"Served  him  right,"  said  Hornebog.  "Whosoever  has  a  sword 
in  his  hand  and  a  horse's  back  between  his  shanks  knows  very 
well  why  he  is  in  the  world." 

I  must  confess  great  sympathy  with  this  barbarian.  An  active 
life  has  little  need  of  metaphysics. 

There  are,  however,  a  few  practical  precepts  that  seem  useful 
in  adding  to  the  sum  of  a  man's  happiness.  Perhaps  the  most 
cheerful  among  these  is  the  maxim  that  since  there  are  two  sorts 
of  evils,  things  you  can  help  and  things  you  cannot,  a  man  ought 
not  to  worry  about  the  first,  but  do  what  he  can  to  mend  them; 
nor  about  the  second,  for  that  does  not  do  the  slightest  good. 
Of  course  there  are  some  griefs  so  overwhelming  that  no  maxim 
can  turn  them  aside,  but  I  have  found  this  one  of  real  value  in 
diminishing  many  of  the  vexations  of  life. 

Little  has  been  the  need,  however,  even  of  this  sort  of  philoso 
phy  in  a  life  singularly  free  from  vexations.  Not  only  have  I  been 
able  to  follow  the  pursuits  most  congenial,  not  only  have  I  lived 
long  in  a  home  I  would  not  change  for  any  other,  but  in  that 
field  which  touches  a  man's  inmost  being  I  have  been  fortunate 
far  beyond  my  deserts.  I  have  had  at  all  times  the  unfailing  love 
of  those  who  were  dearest  to  me.  Most  of  them  are  still  here, 
and  of  those  who  are  gone  no  memory  is  tinged  with  a  shadow 
of  remorse  or  bitterness. 

Returning  to  my  simple  philosophy,  one  tiling  distinctly  no 
ticeable  is  that  very  few  people  seem  to  realise  what  is  important 
and  what  is  not.  It  sometimes  requires  a  great  grief  to  convince 
a  man  how  utterly  futile  are  the  commonplace  cares  of  life.  The 


224  PERSONALIA 

main  thing  is  to  keep  our  aims  on  adequate  things.  It  is  per 
haps  not  so  important  to  do  a  great  many  things  as  to  see  that 
everything  done  is  worth  the  doing. 

Another  maxim  which  experience  confirms  is  the  old  one  that 
in  most  things  the  middle  course  is  the  wisest.  There  is  hardly 
any  subject  to  which  this  does  not  apply.  Take,  for  instance, 
selfishness  and  altruism;  a  reasonable  regard  for  one's  own  inter 
est  is  not  only  necessary  to  personal  success,  but  is  of  advantage 
to  the  world,  for  if  each  man  does  well  for  himself  the  com 
munity  will  be  prosperous.  Yet  selfishness,  to  be  valuable  either 
to  its  possessor  or  to  mankind,  must  be  enlightened  selfishness, 
illumined  by  sympathy,  by  public  spirit  and  by  the  consciousness 
that  our  own  highest  good  can  be  obtained  only  in  conjunction 
with  the  welfare  of  those  around  us.  Co-operative  effort  will  do 
immensely  more  in  most  things  than  mere  individual  effort;  yet 
that  collectivism  which  would  wholly  stifle  a  man's  independent 
action,  in  industry  or  in  society,  would  be  deadening  to  the  whole. 
The  true  path  lies  between  the  extremes. 

And  there  it  lies  in  respect  to  other  things — between  avarice 
and  prodigality,  between  asceticism  and  self-indulgence,  between 
obstinacy  and  vacillation,  between  tyranny  and  license,  between 
severity  and  laxity  in  discipline.  We  may  err  in  fixing  the  pre 
cise  point  where  the  golden  mean  is  to  be  found,  but  we  will  not 
often  err  in  avoiding  extremes  on  either  side.  Human  society, 
like  nature,  advances  by  degrees,  by  certain  compromises  between 
a  new  thought  or  a  new  organism  and  its  surroundings,  and  those 
who  seek  to  reach  at  a  bound  the  final  goal  rarely  accomplish 
much  practical  good.  While  it  is  unsafe  to  treat  any  maxim  or 
formula  outside  of  mathematics  as  of  universal  application,  and 
while  for  effective  immediate  action  half-way  measures  are  some 
times  disastrous,  there  are  few  rules  of  conduct  more  generally 
true  than  that  expressed  in  the  ancient  phrase,  "In  media  tutissi- 
mus  Ibis" 

It  is  sometimes  said  that  the  old  man  clings  just  as  tenaciously 
to  life  and  dreads  the  final  hour  as  much  as  the  young  man.  I 
do  not  believe  this  is  true.  While  I  was  preparing  for  the  active 
work  of  life  I  was  attacked  by  a  severe  case  of  malarial  fever 
followed  by  tuberculosis.  After  two  years  of  vigorous  treatment 


PHILOSOPHY  OF  LIFE  225 

the  trouble  disappeared.  But  during  that  time  it  seemed  as  if 
a  menace  were  continually  hanging  over  me,  as  if  my  way  were 
beset  by  the  footsteps  of  the  destroyer.  Life  was  just  opening 
with  its  visions  of  happiness  and  usefulness  and  the  idea  of  pass 
ing  away  was  like  a  nightmare. 

But  in  recent  years,  although  once  dangerously  ill,  I  had  no 
such  feeling  of  dismay.  When  your  course  has  been  run,  why 
murmur  that  you  are  near  the  end?  A  few  years  more  or  less 
— what  does  it  matter?  From  the  long  suffering  which  often 
precedes  final  dissolution  there  is  still  a  shrinking  and  from  the 
grief  of  parting  with  those  I  love  and  because  of  their  sorrow 
when  I  am  gone.  But  oi  death  itself  I  have  no  particle  of  dread 
and  trust  that  when  it  comes  I  may  still  be  content. 

Three  score  and  ten !    The  tumult  of  the  world 

Grows  dull  upon  my  inattentive  ear; 
The  bugle  calls  are  faint,  the  flags  are  furled, 

Gone  is  the  rapture,  vanished  too  the  fear, 
The  evening's  blessed  stillness  covers  all, 

As  o'er  the  fields  she  folds  her  cloak  of  grey; 
Hushed  are  the  winds,  the  brown  leaves  slowly  fail, 

The  russet  clouds  hang  on  the  fringe  of  day. 
What  fairer  hour  than  this?     No  stir  of  morn, 

With  cries  of  wakening  life,  nor  shafts  of  noon- 
Hot  tresses  from  the  flaming  Sun-god  torn — 

Nor  midnight's  shivering  stars  and  marble  moon ; 
But  softly  twilight  falls  and  toil  doth  cease, 
While  o'er  ray  soul  God  spreads  His  mantle— peace. 

— Life's  Evening. 


APPENDIX  I 

INDIANA'S  OUTPUT.      £PEECH  BEFORE  THE 

INDIANA  SOCIETY  OF  CHICAGO,  JANUARY  28,  1908 

IN  a  negro  church  in  an  Indiana  town  the  pastor  thus  addressed  his 
congregation :  "Brudderen  and  Sisters,  ma  sermon  is  divided  into 
t'ree  pahts — de  subjick,  de  subjick  mattah,  and  de  'rousement.  As  de 
hour  is  late  we  will  omit  de  fust  two  pahts  and  proceed  direckly  to  de 
'rousement."  And  he  did.  Now  with  me  the  subject  and  the  subject- 
matter  of  my  toast  are  too  gigantic  for  after-dinner  treatment.  The 
after-dinner  speech  should  correspond  in  length  with  the  skirt  of  the 
ballet  dancer,  "qui  commen^ait  A  peine  et  finissait  deja."  And,  alas! 
I  have  not  the  Ethiopian  qualifications  for  the  "  'rousement"  Indiana's 
output!  Where  shall  I  begin  and  where  shall  I  end?  The  diminutive 
city  from  which  I  come  proposed  a  year  ago  to  celebrate  the  centennial 
of  its  existence.  It  is  an  older  place  than  Chicago  and  naturally  looks 
down  upon  the  metropolis  as  a  parvenu.  We  issued  a  prospectus  with 
a  list  of  one  hundred  and  twelve  Richmond  authors!  If  these  great 
men  are  unknown  to  the  rest  of  mankind,  why,  that  is  the  fault  of  the 
world,  not  ours.  Dr.  Johnson  could  give  a  definition,  but  not  the 
capacity  to  comprehend  it.  My  town  can  furnish  authors,  but  not  the 
ability  to  appreciate  them. 

But  the  literary  fertility  of  Richmond  is  a  mere  sample.  The  mass 
of  Indiana's  output  everywhere  is  immense,  and  the  topics  are  in 
finitely  varied.  We  have  the  homespun  and  the  hero,  the  Bard  of  Alamo, 
to  give  us  in  pathetic  measures  certain  illustrative  details  of  the  Monon 
wreck,  and  more  aspiring  scribes  to  furnish  us  with  the  most  select 
assortments  of  Kankakee  princesses  and  the  most  regal  types  of 
Kokomo  kings !  Ah,  would  that  I  could  adequately  describe  the  traits 
and  the  triumphs  of  Indiana's  output  in  literature !  I  would  do  it  with 
the  sympathetic  touch  of  that  artist  who,  in  the  basement  of  No.  8l 
Washington  Street,  of  your  city,  under  the  figure  of  a  charming  lady, 
placed  the  seductive  words,  "John  Robertson,  Portrait  Painter — Beau 
ties  accentuated  and  likeness  preserved."  But,  alas !  my  slender  talents 
make  such  portraiture  impossible.  I  can  only  say  "Look  around  you." 

But  is  not  that  enough  ?  When  we  look  upon  ourselves,  who  of  us  is 
there  that  can  remain  unconvinced  that  Attica  was  barren  indeed,  even 
in  intellectual  achievements,  by  the  side  of  the  Hoosier  State?  What 
was  Aristophanes  in  the  shadow  of  Ade,  Demosthenes  at  the  fee/ 

227 


228  APPENDIX  I 

of  Beveridge,  or  Pericles  as  the  boss  of  a  little  Athenian  toy  machine, 
a  rudimentary  screw  of  Archimedes  in  comparison  with  the  Lusitanian 
turbine  operated  by  the  mighty  Fairbanks  ?  What  were  Parrhasius  and 
Zeuxis  when  compared  with  our  gifted  toastmaster  ?  *  There  is  an 
utter  lack  of  perspective  in  calling  Crawfordsville  the  "Athens  of 
Indiana."  A  better  sense  of  proportion  will  lead  future  generations  to 
consider  Athens  as  the  Crawfordsville  of  a  ruder  and  more  barbarous 
age. 

Led  for  so  many  years  through  the  valley  of  humility  by  the  meek 
and  lowly  Beveridge,  we  have  all  worn  the  violet  too  long — it  is  time 
to  thrust  the  sunflower  through  our  buttonholes.  Walt  Whitman  sang 
himself.  Let  us,  to  more  majestic  measures,  sing  ourselves.  Oh, 
that  I  had  the  power  of  Zeus  to  compel,  not  the  clouds,  but  the 
recognition  of  the  Universe  for  the  hegemony  of  Indiana  in  all  things 
that  sparkle  with  divine  fire! 

We  ought  to  take,  once  and  for  all,  that  attitude  of  conscious  worth 
portrayed  in  the  immortal  stanza: 

"There  was  a  young  prince  of  Siam 
Who  met  up  with  Omar  Khayyam. 
Said  the  prince  then  to  Omar, 
'You're  better  than  Homer.' 
Said  Omar  Khayyam,  'I  am.' " 

Some  years  ago,  a  philanthropist,  determined  at  last  to  do  justice 
to  our  State,  projected  a  book  entitled  "The  American  Biographical 
History  of  Eminent  and  Self-Made  Men  in  Indiana"  and  went  about 
the  State  soliciting  subscriptions.  The  price,  including  a  biography  of 
each  subscriber,  was  twenty-five  dollars,  and  seventy-five  additional  for 
a  steel  engraving.  For  the  purpose  of  accuracy,  blanks  were  fur 
nished  to  each  of  these  subscribers,  which  they  themselves  filled  out, 
making  skeletons  of  their  respective  illustrious  lives,  which  were  after 
wards  padded  out  in  appropriate  "good  English"  by  the  editor.  When 
the  book  appeared  it  consisted  of  two  enormous  volumes,  containing 
biographies  by  the  thousands  of  the  representatives  of  Indiana's  great 
ness.  A  number  of  the  sketches  bear  unmistakable  evidence  that  they 
are  the  handiwork  of  the  great  ones  whose  lives  they  respectively 
delineate,  and  as  to  many  of  these  self-made  men,  no  one  would  suspect 
any  diviner  origin!  An  encouraging  feature  of  the  work  was  the 
proof  it  gave  of  the  large  proportion  of  Indiana's  great  men  who  are 
still  living.  Dead  men  tell  no  tales  and  pay  no  bills,  wherefore  the 
words  of  the  poet  that  "all  who  tread  the  earth  are  but  a  handful  to 
the  tribes  that  slumber  in  its  bosom"  have  been  strangely  reversed  in 

xMr.  John  McCutcheon,  cartoonist  for  the  Chicago  Tribune. 


APPENDIX  I  229 

the  case  of  the  celebrated  men  of  Indiana.  Scarcely  one  in  fifty  is 
dead. 

The  book  goes  quite  fully  into  details;  but  in  relation  to  the  great 
no  item  can  be  considered  trifling.  We  are  told,  for  instance,  that  a 
certain  physician  is  five  feet,  nine  inches  in  height;  that  he  weighs 
one  hundred  and  ninety  pounds.  These  facts  are  interesting,  not  only 
to  those  who  know  him,  but  to  the  world  at  large,  to  whom  he  is  a 
worthy  object  of  emulation  in  these  respects. 

Another  satisfactory  thing  shown  by  the  book  is  the  estimable  and 
even  perfect  characters  of  the  great  men  of  our  State.  Elsewhere 
greatness  has  its  faults ;  in  Indiana  it  appears  to  be  dimmed  by  not 
even  a  foible.  We  read  of  a  distinguished  townsman  that  "his  life 
has  been  eminently  marked  by  perfect  probity;  he  never  withholds 
one  penny's  worth  in  submitting  the  valuation  of  his  property  for 
assessment."  What  a  model  for  our  contemplation!  The  only  suspi 
cious  circumstance  is  the  silence  of  the  biography  regarding  the  other 
great  men  of  Indiana  in  this  respect. 

Some  names  indeed  are  missing  which  we  should  expect  to  see. 
But  where  a  man  is  unwilling  to  pay  the  moderate  sum  of  twenty- 
five  dollars  for  an  eternal  name  he  deserves  to  be  consigned  to 
oblivion. 

But  even  in  immortality  there  must  be  pre-eminence.  Some  names 
must  occur  more  readily  to  the  memory  than  others.  In  a  school 
in  Denmark  the  problem  was  given :  "Name  six  animals  native  to 
Greenland."  The  class  was  silent  till  a  little  girl  raised  her  hand. 
"What  are  they,  Ingeborg?" 

"Four   seals    and   two    polar   bears." 

At  one  of  our  Richmond  schools  a  much  simpler  question  was 
propounded:  "Name  fifty  of  the  most  distinguished  of  the  living 
novelists  of  Indiana."  Plain  and  easy  as  that  question  was,  the 
class  failed  to  respond  until  a  small  boy  stood  up  with  that  confi 
dence  which  is  the  offspring  of  exact  science  and  replied:  "Twenty 
Booth  Tarkingtons,  ten  Majors,  fifteen  McCutcheons  and  five  Mere 
dith  Nicholsons !" 

Thus  does  pre-eminence  assert  itself. 

I  feel  a  special  pride,  too,  in  the  statesmanship  of  Indiana.  I  feel 
drawn  to  it  by  ties  of  kindred  almost  as  closely  as  I  feel  drawn  to  my 
friend  Tarkington.  In  him,  gentlemen,  you  see  that  glorious  combi 
nation  of  statesmanship  and  literature,  which,  like  the  universal  genius 
of  the  Renaissance,  sheds  its  lustre  over  all  time.  In  me,  too,  gentle 
men,  I  wish  you  could  see  the  same  thing.  I  would  be,  as  it  were, 
a  moon  to  his  sun,  but  the  moon's  rays  are  different.  With  him,  if 
I  judge  aright  his  past  career,  his  literature  greatly  outweighs  his 
statesmanship.  But  in  my  softer  and  kindlier  light  I  feel  convinced 
that  my  statesmanship  greatly  outweighs  my  literature.  It  is  probably 


230  APPENDIX  1 

quite  unknown  to  you  that  there  is  any  literature  at  all,  but  there  is; 
and  literature,  strange  as  it  may  seem  to  you,  of  the  most  important 
character.  I  have  recently  translated  "The  History  of  the  Langobards" 
(a  people  closely  and  intimately  related  to  our  own  most  vital  inter 
ests)  by  Paul  the  Deacon,  a  monk  of  the  time  of  Charlemagne,  to 
whom  the  Hoosier  State  is  naturally  drawn  by  ties  of  closest  sym 
pathy.  By  assiduous  entreaty  I  have  persuaded  some  twenty  or 
thirty  of  my  personal  friends  to  accept  gratuitously  that  number  of 
author's  copies  and  have  thus  secured  a  limited  circulation  of  this 
invaluable  work.  Pardon  me  for  mentioning  the  subject  here.  An 
opportunity  like  this  for  the  dissemination  of  useful  knowledge  on 
such  an  important  matter  may  not  occur  again. 

This  contribution  to  historical  literature  is  perhaps  not  unlike  the 
efforts  of  the  Norwegian  girl,  just  landed  in  Boston,  to  secure  a 
situation. 

"Can  you  cook?"  asked  the  enquiring  employer. 

"No." 

"Can  you  wash  and  iron?" 

"No." 

"Can  you  sew?" 

"No." 

"Can  you  wait  on  table?" 

"No." 

"Can  you  make  the  beds?" 

"No." 

"What  can  you  do?" 

"I  can  milk  a  reindeer." 

The  demand  for  Paul  the  Deacon  in  Indiana  seems  equal  to  the 
demand  for  reindeer-milking  in  universal  Boston.  There  is  need  for 
more  specialization.  Tarkington  may  cook,  Riley  may  sew,  Nicholson 
may  make  the  beds,  Major  may  wash  and  McCutcheon  sweep  the 
rooms,  but  when  the  time  comes  to  milk  the  reindeer  then  look  to 
me. 

But  if  I  feel  an  interest  in  Indiana  literature  and  statesmanship, 
my  devotion  to  Indiana  journalism  is  not  less  enthusiastic.  I  am  almost 
a  journalist  myself;  indeed,  I  feel  quite  a  journalist  when  it  comes  to 
paying  the  bills  for  running  the  paper.  Well,  Indiana  journalism  has 
spoken.  It  has  spoken  in  praise  of  Indiana  statesmanship,  and  these 
are  its  words,  uttered  at  the  meeting  of  Republican  editors  in  respect 
of  Indiana's  candidate  for  the  Presidency:2 

"In  him  we  see  embodied  the  perception  of  a  Lincoln,  the  dignity  of 
a  Grant,  the  wisdom  of  a  Harrison,  the  gentleness  of  a  McKinley  and 
the  fearlessness  of  a  Roosevelt,  a  combination  of  attributes  that  round 

2  Fairbanks. 


APPENDIX  I  231 

out  a  man  superbly  equipped  for  the  duties  and  responsibilities  of  Chief 
Executive." 

In  thus  honouring  its  great  leader  and  sustainer  (I  will  not  say  pro 
prietor)  Indiana  journalism  honoured  itself  1  Can  any  son  of  Indiana 
look  upon  our  candidate  and  compare  him  with  the  one  who  dwells 
beyond  our  eastern  border 3  without  feeling  that  longitude  is  more 
stately  than  latitude  and  altitude  more  lofty  than  avoirdupois? 

Scarcely  less  distinguished  than  in  literature  and  statesmanship  is 
Indiana's  output  in  finance.  Metternich  said  of  Napoleon  that  the 
quality  he  most  admired  was  "la  grande  simplicite  de  la  marche  de  son 
esprit."  During  the  late  panic  the  conduct  of  the  bankers  of  Indi 
anapolis  was  characterised  by  principles  of  Napoleonic  simplicity — they 
supported  our  financial  fabric  by  simply  and  unpretentiously  hanging 
on  to  every  dollar  they  had  and  all  they  could  get — no  country  bank 
could  draw,  no  depositor  could  become  extravagant,  and  thus  by 
encouraging  the  precepts  of  high  thinking  and  plain  living  they  stood 
as  an  irresistible  bulwark  between  the  iniquities  of  Wall  Street  on  the 
one  side  and  the  demands  of  their  depositors  and  correspondents  upon 
the  other. 

And  what  shall  I  say  of  Indiana's  output  in  jurisprudence?  The 
gentleman  you  have  just  heard  sang  the  praises  of  the  country  lawyer. 
Our  Bar  is  indeed  incomparable,  but  what  would  it  be  without  the 
Bench?  And  what  bench  can  compare  with  that  which  Indiana  has 
given  to  the  world?  For  it  was  a  Hoosier  jurist,  an  Orpheus  in  ermine, 
whose  tones  first  awakened  the  sweet,  sad,  remonstrant  voices  of  Stand 
ard  Oil  and  called  forth  their  feline  harmonies  from  out  the  eternal 
silences!  To  him  we  owe  the  notes  of  the  president  of  the  Indiana 
corporation,  who, 

"As  a  wakeful  bird 

Sang  darkling,  and  in  shadiest  covert  hid 
Tuned  his  nocturnal  note." 

Could  Coke  or  Mansfield  or  John  Marshall  ever  have  wrought  the 
miracle?  Nature  demanded  more — she  required  the  union  of  Kenesaw 
Mountain  with  the  Hoosier  State.4 

There  is  of  course  Indiana's  output  in  baser  and  grosser  things,  a 
few  hundred  thousand  Studebaker  wagons,  a  few  million  Oliver 
ploughs,  an  infinite  number  of  Hoosier  drills  sent  to  all  parts  of  the 

s  Taft. 

4  Judge  Kenesaw  M.  Landis  had  fined  the  Standard  Oil  Company 
some  twenty-odd  millions  of  dollars  (the  limit  of  the  law)  and  had 
thereby  elicited  the  first  public  remonstrance  from  any  of  the  officers 
of  the  company,  who  had  previously  ignored  all  complaints. 


232  APPENDIX  I 

universe,  and  threshers  and  reapers  and  harvesters  and  engines  and 
the  smokestacks  of  countless  industries  "waving"  (I  quote  the  editorial 
association)  "their  black  plumes  in  the  sky!"  And  railroads!  Oh,  so 
many,  and  such  railroads !  Whizzing  and  tooting  and  rattling  before 
the  doors  of  every  Hoosier  farmer!  But  all  such  things  I  scorn — the 
delights  of  the  spirit  alone  invite  me. 

And  you  who  have  left  us,  do  you  reflect  what  you  have  done?  How 
could  you  thus  lightly  abandon  the  things  of  the  soul  for  the  mere 
delights  of  the  flesh?  Indiana,  as  my  successor  will  show  you,  is  a 
State  of  Mind!  How  different  from  Illinois!  Indiana  journalism 
asked  me  for  a  manuscript  of  what  I  was  going  to  say  to  you — Chicago 
made  the  unintellectual  demand  of  a  photograph!  And  you  have 
moved  from  Indiana  to  Chicago!  Moved  from  Parnassus  to  the 
Cloaca  Maxima!  How  could  you  do  it? 


APPENDIX  II 

ADDRESS  AT  THE  OPENING  SESSION  OF  THE  NATIONAL 

AMERICAN    WOMAN    SUFFRAGE    ASSOCIATION, 

WASHINGTON,  D.  C,  FEB.   18,  1890 

THERE  is  no  subject  upon  which  the  indignation  of  our  people  is 
more  easily  aroused  than  in  regard  to  crimes  against  the  suffrage. 
From  Dan  to  Beersheba,  after  each  election,  come  complaints  of  force 
and  fraud.  Investigations  follow,  and  once  in  a  while  there  is  a  trial 
and  a  conviction  for  some  offence  against  the  election  laws.  What  is  the 
gist  of  these  offences?  It  is  that  in  some  way  contrary  to  law,  some 
citizen  is  deprived  of  his  equal  voice  in  the  making  and  administration 
of  these  laws. 

Now,  if  the  only  thing  of  importance  is  the  enactment  of  good  laws 
or  their  administration  by  good  officers,  it  might  be  of  little  consequence 
how  the  latter  are  chosen.  The  forged  tally-sheet  might  return  the 
best  man.  The  suppression  of  the  negro  vote  in  the  South  has  resulted 
in  greater  intelligence  and  honesty  in  the  administration  of  State 
affairs.  If,  by  expending  a  little  money  at  the  polls,  you  save  a  vast 
amount  of  money  to  the  protected  interests  of  the  country,  what  is  the 
harm?  If  you  have  a  good  government,  what  matter  how  you  get  it? 

But  yet  there  lies  behind  this  sophistry  the  conviction  that  the 
fundamental  right  of  self-government,  the  right  of  each  man  to  cast 
his  single  vote  and  have  it  counted  as  it  is  cast,  is  of  greater  and 
more  lasting  importance  than  any  of  the  temporary  consequences  which 
flow  from  the  result  of  the  election ;  that  beyond  all  matters  of  ex 
pediency  and  good  administration,  lies  the  great  question  of  human 
liberty  and  equality,  which  can  only  be  maintained  by  the  uncor- 
rupted  equal  suffrage  of  every  citizen;  and  so  sacred  is  this  in  the 
eyes  of  the  law  that  years  of  penitentiary  service  are  prescribed  for 
the  interference  with  the  right  of  a  single  human  being  of  the  male 
sex  to  cast  the  vote  which  the  law  allows  him. 

But  there  may  be  a  moral  guilt,  outside  the  law,  of  a  character  quite 
similar  to  that  which  is  so  punished  when  it  comes  within  the  terms 
of  the  statute;  and  it  may  be  the  crime,  not  of  a  single  law-breaker, 
but  of  the  entire  community  which  establishes  constitutions  and  enacts 
statutes  denying  equal  rights  to  citizens  who  are  subject  to  equal 
burdens.  Wherever  the  simple  rule  of  power  is  substituted  for  the 
just  and  equitable  principle  that  all  who  are  subject  to  government 
should  have  a  voice  in  controlling  it,  we  are  guilty,  under  the  form, 

233 


234  APPENDIX  II 

of  law,  of  the  same  violation  of  the  just  rights  of  another  for  which 
the  corrupter  of  elections  and  the  forger  of  tally-sheets  is  tried, 
convicted  and  incarcerated.  But  from  the  remotest  time  the  world 
has  done  this  thing ;  equal  rights  have  never  been  conceded  to  women ; 
and  so  warped  are  our  convictions  by  custom  and  prejudice  that  a 
denial  of  their  political  equality  seems  as  natural  as  the  breath  we 
draw. 

How  strongly  we  are  moved  by  other  cases  of  the  violation  of 
liberty !  It  is  only  a  few  days  since  the  wrath  of  our  people 
was  awakened  by  the  recital  of  outrages  committed  upon  the  helpless 
body  of  a  woman,  a  prisoner  in  Siberian  mines ;  and  I  think  I  do  not 
mistake  the  sentiment  of  the  people  when  I  say  that  they  attribute 
incidents  like  these,  not  to  the  sporadic  cruelty  of  a  single  prison 
official,  but  to  the  abominable  system  which  renders  the  life,  liberty 
and  property  of  every  Russian,  subject  to  the  mere  caprice  of  the 
autocrat  and  his  minions.  We  say  that  it  is  monstrous  that  the  fate 
of  millions  should  depend  upon  the  whim  of  a  single  man ;  that,  in 
the  eyes  of  the  great  and  just  Ruler  of  the  universe,  the  helpless  victim 
is  the  equal  of  the  head  of  this  organised  persecution;  and  whatever 
may  be  our  sentiments  as  to  the  means  employed,  we  should  have  the 
heartiest  sympathy  with  any  proper  effort  by  the  Russian  people  to 
free  themselves  from  this  unnatural  yoke.  It  is  the  principle  of  auto 
cratic  rule  which  is  the  inherent  vice.  No  matter  how  good  the  Czar, 
so  long  as  he  denies  to  his  subjects  the  power  to  participate  in  the 
government  his  administration  is,  and  must  be,  wicked  and  unjust. 

So,  too,  with  the  Irish  agitation.  The  English  Government  may  give 
relief  to  tenants ;  it  may  lower  their  rents  and  give  them  an  adminis 
tration  better  than  the  one  they  would  choose  for  themselves;  but  the 
mere  fact  that  this  right  of  choice  is  taken  from  them,  makes  the  rule 
of  England  a  practical  oppression. 

The  thing  was  even  more  clearly  shown  in  the  revolt  to  which 
our  national  existence  owes  its  origin.  It  was  not  the  heaviness  of 
the  burden  of  the  stamp  act  or  the  tax  on  tea ;  it  was  because  any 
form  of  taxation  without  representation  was  tyranny,  because  all  gov 
ernment  derived  its  just  powers  from  the  consent  of  the  governed,  that 
our  fathers  would  not  submit  to  English  rule. 

And  yet  these  things,  that  seem  so  plain  and  self-evident  when  we 
look  at  them  from  a  distance,  are  vague  and  misty  when  they  stand 
beside  our  own  doors.  Paternalism  in  government,  which  seeks  to 
do  good  to  the  people  against  their  will,  is  bad  enough  in  the  Czar 
of  Russia  and  in  old  King  George,  but  it  is  quite  right  and  just  when 
it  affects  our  wives,  sisters  and  daughters.  They  have  everything 
they  need;  why  ask  the  ballot?  Ah,  my  friends,  so  long  as  they 
have  not  the  right  to  determine  the  thing  they  need,  so  long  as  the 
ultimate  power  remains  with  us  to  say  what  is  good  and  what 


APPENDIX  II  235 

is  bad  for  them,  they  are  deprived  of  that  which  we  ourselves  esteem 
the  most  precious  of  all  rights.  I  suppose  there  never  was  a  time 
when  men  did  not  believe  that  women  had  everything  they  ought  to 
want;  that  they  had  as  much  as  was  good  for  them.  The  woman 
must  obey,  in  consideration  of  the  kind  protection  which  her  lord  vouch 
safes  to  her.  The  wife's  property  ought  to  belong  to  the  husband, 
because  upon  him  the  law  casts  the  burden  of  sustaining  the  family. 
There  must  be  one  ruler,  and  the  husband  ought  to  be  that  one.  But 
this  is  the  same  principle  which  during  centuries  and  thousands  of 
years  maintained  the  divine  right  of  kings.  When  we  apply  it  to 
our  system  of  suffrage,  the  number  of  sovereigns  is  increased,  that  is 
all.  The  divine  right  of  man  to  legislate  for  himself  and  woman  too, 
is  upheld  by  laws  which  receive  the  sanction  of  his  vote  alone.  It  is 
only  a  difference  in  the  number  of  autocrats  and  the  manner  in  which 
their  decrees  are  promulgated. 

We  object  to  human  slavery,  not  merely  on  account  of  the  individual 
instances  of  hardship  and  outrage  which  it  entails,  but  because  we 
believe  that,  however  kind  the  master,  it  is  wrong  in  principle  that 
the  destinies  of  one  man  should  be  confided  to  the  keeping  of  another. 
But  put  this  proposition  in  another  shape,  it  is  equally  unjust  that  the 
destinies  of  one  race  should  be  placed  under  the  control  of  alien  blood ; 
and  in  still  another  shape,  it  is  equally  unjust  that  the  rights  of  one 
sex  should  be  granted  or  withheld  solely  at  the  good  pleasure  of  the 
other.  The  sovereignty  is  just  as  complete  which  is  exercised  in  the 
form  of  general  laws.  There  is  some  amelioration  of  the  practical 
conditions,  but  the  principle  is  just  as  iniquitous. 

And  this  unjust  principle  is  sure  to  give  rise  to  unjust  laws.  There 
never  was  a  time  when  men  in  their  legislation  respected  in  all  par 
ticulars  the  equal  rights  of  women.  They  certainly  did  not  under  the 
older  systems.  The  laws  of  Manu  prescribed  that  at  no  time  should 
a  woman  govern  herself  according  to  her  own  will.  Before  she  was 
married  she  was  subject  to  her  father,  then  to  her  husband,  and,  he 
dying,  to  her  sons ;  or  if  she  had  none,  then  to  her  nearest  male  rela 
tive,  and  in  default  of  this,  to  the  king.  At  no  time  could  she  rule 
herself  according  to  her  own  will.  The  Greeks  improved  but  little 
upon  this  idea.  Among  the  Romans,  a  woman's  property  and  civil 
rights  were  mainly  at  the  disposal  of  either  her  father  or  her  husband. 
By  the  Code  Napoleon  of  France,  the  joint  property  belonged  to  the 
husband,  and  however  brutal  he  might  be,  he  could  compel  her  to  live 
with  him,  even  if  he  had  to  bring  her  to  his  home  between  a  brace 
of  gendarmes.  The  common  law  of  England  was  just  as  bad.  When 
she  married,  all  her  personal  property  became  her  husband's  by  the 
act  of  marriage,  all  her  outstanding  claims  were  his  as  soon  as  he 
saw  fit  to  reduce  them  to  possession.  Her  real  estate  belonged  to  him 
during  their  joint  lives;  or  if  a  child  was  born  to  them,  remained  his 


236  APPENDIX  II 

for  life;  not  a  penny  nor  foot  of  land  could  she  call  her  own.  The 
children  were  subject  to  his  will;  and  he  might  beat  her  pro 
vided  the  rod  were  no  thicker  than  the  judge's  thumb.  Gradually 
these  hard  conditions  have  been  ameliorated,  but  still  her  condition 
remains  one  of  inequality.  There  are  States  in  which  she  cannot  make 
a  contract,  where  her  own  earnings  do  not  belong  to  her;  and  even 
where  these  iniquities  have  been  swept  away,  the  door  is  still  closed 
to  all  political  preferment.  All  this  as  the  law  tells  us  is  for  her 
good. 

Now,  I  am  utterly  opposed  to  every  form  of  doing  good  to  people 
against  their  will.  I  am  opposed  to  every  sort  of  divine  right,  whether 
of  a  king  or  an  aristocracy,  of  a  single  race  or  of  a  single  sex.  If 
woman  did  not  suffer  from  this  absence  of  political  power,  it  would 
be  the  only  instance  in  history  where  a  class  deprived  of  political  rights 
has  not  been  the  worse  for  this  disability.  In  the  progress  of  civilisa 
tion  from  despotism  to  constitutional  government,  one  class  after  an 
other,  one  race  after  another,  found  that  some  share  in  the  government 
was  necessary  for  the  protection  of  its  rights.  The  barons  wrested 
it  from  King  John;  the  wealthy  burghers  acquired  the  right  to  share 
it  with  the  barons.  Gradually  through  the  various  strata  of  society 
filtered  this  divine  right,  this  right  of  sovereignty,  this  right  of  suffrage, 
until  at  last  it  has  been  extended  even  to  the  lowest. 

So  in  America :  first  it  was  a  property  qualification,  then  it  was  a 
race  qualification.  Step  by  step  has  the  franchise  been  extorted  from 
its  exclusive  possessors,  until  now  it  embraces  practically  the  entire 
human  family  of  the  male  sex.  If  the  principles  upon  which  these 
advances  have  been  made  are  true,  the  movement  cannot  stop  here. 

It  is  wrong  in  principle  to  say  to  our  sisters  what  avenues  of  activity 
and  employment  shall  be  open  to  them  and  what  shall  be  barred;  and 
it  is  just  as  wrong  to  close  the  single  gate  of  political  preferment  as 
to  shut  them  out  from  any  other  lawful  occupation.  By  what  argu 
ment  can  you  justify  it,  and  defend  your  own  political  liberty?  By 
what  argument  can  you  defend  your  own  suffrage  as  a  right  and  not 
concede  an  equal  right  to  her?  A  just  man  ought  to  accord  to  every 
other  human  being,  even  to  his  own  wife,  the  rights  which  he  demands 
for  himself. 

"But  she  has  her  sphere,  and  she  ought  not  to  go  beyond  it."  My 
friend,  who  gave  you  the  right  to  determine  what  that  sphere  should 
be?  If  nature  prescribes  it,  nature  will  carry  out  her  own  ordinances 
without  your  prohibitory  legislation.  I  have  the  greatest  contempt  for 
the  sort  of  legislation  which  seeks  to  enable  nature  to  enforce  her 
own  immutable  laws.  I  should  have  very  little  respect  for  any  decree, 
enacted  with  whatever  solemnity,  which  prescribed  that  an  object 
should  fall  towards  the  earth  and  not  from  it;  and  I  have  just  as  little 
respect  for  any  statute  of  man  which  enacts  that  mothers  shall  continue 


APPENDIX  II  237 

to  love  their  children,  by  shutting  women  out  from  political  action  and 
preferment  lest  they  should  neglect  the  duties  of  the  household. 

I  was  much  amused  at  the  recent  colloquy  between  Mrs.  Stanton  and 
the  chairman  of  the  Congressional  Committee,  when  he  asked  her 
whether  woman  would  not  lose  much  of  the  refining  influences  that 
now  bless  our  race,  if  political  opportunities  were  thrown  open  to  her. 
What !  Lose  refining  influences  because  the  field  of  her  opportunity 
is  widened?  If  that  be  true,  the  Turk  is  a  great  deal  more  logical 
than  the  American.  There  we  have  the  refining  influences  of  the 
seraglio,  the  household  sphere.  There  we  find  woman  preserved,  not 
only  from  the  rude  gaze  of  men,  not  only  from  the  degrading  commerce 
of  the  world,  but  even  from  the  kisses  of  the  sun  upon  her  face. 
If  her  sphere  be  always  to  stay  at  home  to  look  after  her  children, 
whether  she  have  any  children  or  not,  the  customs  of  our  Oriental 
brothers  are  admirably  calculated  to  accomplish  this  result.  How 
desperately  the  refining  influences  of  the  sexes  were  sacrificed  when 
the  doors  of  church  and  college,  of  Sunday-school  and  hospital,  were 
thrown  open  to  her,  and  the  defiling  touch  of  the  thousand  occupations 
in  which  even  now,  according  to  our  perverted  notions,  she  can  hon 
ourably  engage !  How  desperately  the  rude  commerce  with  the  world 
in  society,  in  the  church,  nay,  even  in  the  galleries  of  the  Quaker 
meeting-house,  has  shattered  that  gentle  and  refining  influence !  Has 
it  never  occurred  to  the  wise  legislators  who  would  fasten  her  to  the 
cradle  by  statute,  that  every  one  of  these  encroachments  upon  woman's 
sphere  has  made  her  a  better  mother  and  a  better  wife ;  that  the  child 
whom  she  trains,  and  the  husband  whose  helpmate  she  is,  is  the  better 
for  them?  And  if  that  be  true,  when  so  many  steps  are  taken  towards 
her  complete  emancipation,  why  fear  to  add  the  final  one,  the  last,  and 
say  that  in  this  thing  as  in  all  others,  the  condition  of  the  largest  lib 
erty  is  the  condition  of  the  highest  development? 

But  some  of  our  statesmen  to-day,  who  have  outgrown  Mr.  Jeffer 
son  and  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  who  do  not  believe  that 
taxation  without  representation  is  tyranny,  or  that  the  government 
derives  its  just  powers  from  the  consent  of  more  than  half  the  gov 
erned, — these  men  say  that  suffrage  is  no  right,  but  a  privilege  con 
ferred  upon  a  certain  body  of  people  for  the  best  good  of  the  State. 
Who  conferred  it?  Who  had  the  right  to?  Who  has  the  divine 
authority  to  withhold  it  from  another?  To  what  higher  power,  what 
court  of  last  resort,  can  we  appeal?  Who  must  pass  upon  the  qualifi 
cations?  Sovereignty  resides  somewhere.  We  say  that  its  ultimate 
abode  is  among  the  entire  body  of  the  people,  rich  and  poor,  black 
and  white,  male  and  female ;  that  to  assert  anything  different  from 
this  is  simply  to  declare  the  law  of  the  strongest. 

But  some  of  the  politicians  of  this  day  have  not  hesitated  to  take  this 
ground,  which  is  indeed  the  last  refuge  of  the  opponent  of  woman 


238  APPENDIX  11 

suffrage.  Women  must  not  vote  because  they  do  not  fight.  But  if 
women  are  to  be  excluded  on  such  a  ground,  then  why  not  the  aged, 
the  infirm,  the  cripples?  And,  if  men  who  cannot  fight  are  to  be 
left  out,  with  still  greater  reason  should  those  who  can  and  will  not. 
The  army  should  cast  the  suffrage,  and  the  elections  by  the  Praetorian 
guard  in  the  declining  days  of  the  Roman  Empire,  when  they  put  up 
the  imperial  purple  to  the  highest  bidder,  and  old  Didius  Julianus  car 
ried  away  the  prize, — this  form  of  government  is  the  perfect  model 
upon  which  our  institutions  ought  to  repose.  The  Kaffir  who  buys  his 
wife  and  kills  her  when  he  likes,  saying,  "I  have  bought  her  once  for 
all,  and  she  is  mine,"  this  man  only  carries  out  to  its  logical  conse 
quences  the  monstrous  doctrine  that  force  is  after  all  the  just  basis 
of  all  human  government. 

Let  us  ask  ourselves  how  we  should  like  to  be  disfranchised,  and 
from  the  answer  let  us  determine  whether  we  have  the  right  to  refuse 
suffrage  to  any  woman  who  asks  it 

"But,  say  you,  "woman  is  already  adequately  represented.  She  does 
not  form  a  separate  class.  She  has  no  interests  different  from  those 
of  her  husband,  brother,  or  father."  These  arguments  have  been  used 
even  by  so  eminent  an  authority  as  John  Bright.  Is  it  indeed  a  fact? 
Wherever  woman  owns  property  which  she  would  relieve  from  unjust 
taxation;  wherever  she  has  a  son  whom  she  would  preserve  from 
the  temptations  of  intemperance,  or  a  daughter  from  the  enticements 
of  a  libertine,  or  a  husband  from  the  conscriptions  of  war;  she  has  a 
separate  interest  which  she  is  entitled  to  protect.  "But  she  can  con 
trol  legislation  by  her  influence."  If  she  has  influence,  she  is  entitled 
to  that  and  her  vote  too.  You  have  no  right  to  burn  down  a  man's 
house  because  you  leave  him  his  lot.  "But  woman  does  not  want 
the  suffrage."  How  do  you  know?  Did  you  give  her  an  opportunity 
of  saying  so?  Wherever  the  right  has  been  accorded,  it  has  been 
exercised,  and  the  best  proof  of  her  wishes  is  the  actual  use  which 
she  makes  of  the  ballot  when  she  has  it.  But  it  makes  no  difference 
whether  all  women  want  to  vote,  or  whether  most  women  want  to 
vote ;  so  long  as  there  is  one  woman  who  insists  upon  this  simple  right, 
the  justice  of  man  cannot  afford  to  deny  it.  Would  it  be  an  answer 
to  my  claim  for  suffrage  that  a  majority  of  the  men  in  my  town  or 
my  State  did  not  want  it?  So  long  as  I  need  it  to  protect  my  interests, 
it  matters  not  how  many  of  my  fellows  may  be  indifferent  to  theirs. 

We  talk  too  much  as  if  this  question  depended  upon  how  women 
were  going  to  exercise  the  right  when  they  have  it.  What  should  we 
men  think  if  we  were  told  that  we  could  have  the  ballot,  provided 
we  would  vote  in  the  way  that  somebody  else  might  think  was  right? 
Would  not  our  indignant  answer  be,  "It  is  none  of  your  business  how 
I  vote ;  that  matter  I  will  determine  for  myself !"  The  suffrage  under 
the  Bonapartes  was  once  defined  to  be  "the  inalienable  right  which 


APPENDIX  II  239 

every  Frenchman  has  to  cast  one  vote  for  the  eldest  male  heir  of  the 
family."  It  is  this  sort  of  a  right  which  these  men  propose  to  confer, 
who  talk  beforehand  about  the  way  in  which  women  are  likely  to  vote, 
as  reasons  for  bestowing  or  for  withholding  the  suffrage. 

Do  you  still  say,  my  antediluvian  friend,  that  woman  is  intellectu 
ally  inferior?  When  you  went  to  school,  who  stood  at  the  head  of 
your  class?  Was  it  a  boy  or  a  girl?  I  have  heard  of  classes  where 
the  boy  was  first.  I  did  not  belong  to  one.  Wherever  woman  has 
been  tried  as  a  sovereign,  she  has  proved  not  merely  equal  to  the 
average,  but  to  the  highest  instances  of  kingcraft.  What  name  so 
eminent  in  English  history  for  wisdom  and  executive  energy  as  that 
of  Elizabeth?  Who  so  profoundly  revered  in  Spain  as  Isabella  of 
Castile?  Next  to  the  great  Peter,  Catherine  the  Second  of  Russia 
was  the  ablest  of  its  administrators ;  and  no  name  among  the  sovereigns 
of  Austria  is  so  deeply  cherished  as  that  of  Maria  Theresa.  Charles 
the  Fifth  chose  women  to  govern  his  provinces,  because,  as  he  said, 
he  found  them  better  qualified  than  men  for  administrative  duties. 
When  John  Stuart  Mill  examined  the  affairs  of  India  and  discovered 
a  province  governed  with  special  ability,  its  affairs  economically  admin 
istered,  peace  and  prosperity  at  home  and  respect  abroad,  it  was  almost 
uniformly  under  the  control,  not  of  a  man,  but  of  an  Indian  princess. 
It  is  but  seldom  that  woman  has  had  an  opportunity,  but  where  she  has, 
it  is  not  in  that  kind  of  work  at  least  that  her  inferiority  appears.  They 
say  she  never  wrote  a  great  epic  nor  painted  a  Transfiguration.  This 
might  be  an  excuse,  and  a  very  poor  one,  for  passing  laws  forbidding 
women  to  paint  or  to  write  poetry;  but  it  is  the  worst  possible  excuse 
for  a  rule  excluding  them  from  duties  which  they  have  positively 
proved  their  ability  to  perform. 

In  matters  of  business,  her  experience  may  not  have  been  so  wide 
as  ours,  but  in  the  matter  of  moral  purity,  her  standard  is  higher. 
Is  that  the  best  system  of  government  which  gives  a  voice  to  intem 
perance  and  violence,  which  it  denies  to  the  virtue  and  purity  of  home? 
Ought  not  a  complete  representative  government  to  include  the  types 
of  its  better  as  well  as  its  baser  qualities  ?  The  constitution  of  Indiana 
gives  a  vote  to  the  pauper  and  the  idiot  as  well  as  to  the  criminal, 
after  his  term  is  up  and  his  period  of  disfranchisement  has  expired.  In 
one  of  the  last  elections,  the  imbeciles  in  the  poor  farm  at  Indianapolis 
were  brought  to  the  polls  in  a  body;  and  a  man  who,  when  asked  his 
name,  declared  he  was  Jesus  Christ,  and  another  who  had  just  intelli 
gence  enough  to  take  in  his  hand  a  piece  of  paper  handed  to  him  by 
the  political  manager  of  the  precinct  and  give  it  to  the  election  officer, 
were  permitted  to  make  the  laws  which  should  tax  the  property  and 
control  the  fortune  of  every  woman  in  the  State.  I  find  it  hard  to 
understand  the  logic  of  the  law-maker  who  prefers  legislation  by  male 
idiots  to  legislation  by  women.  In  this  case,  as  in  every  other,  the 


240  APPENDIX  II 

course  prescribed  by  the  simple  rules  of  justice  and  duty  is  also  the 
course  demanded  by  common  sense  and  the  best  interests  of  society. 
It  is  that  our  ultimate  rights  shall  rest  upon  the  equal  suffrage  of  both 
the  sexes,  in  the  same  sense  and  to  the  same  extent  that  they  now  rest 
upon  the  suffrages  of  men  alone;  that  there  is  no  limit  to  the  true 
sphere  of  the  lawful  activities  of  woman  except  such  as  is  prescribed 
in  the  fair  field  of  competition  by  natural  law. 

It  is  to  bring  about  this  equality  that  the  National-American  Woman 
Suffrage  Association  has  been  organised.  It  is  for  the  purpose  of 
greater  efficiency  that  the  two  former  associations  have  merged  their 
separate  existence  in  the  new  one. 

The  Association  is  to  be  under  the  leadership  of  those  whose  eminent 
names,  invaluable  services,  and  wide  experience  give  assurance  of  the 
highest  efficiency;  but  even  if  it  had  been  otherwise,  our  duty  would 
have  been  the  same:  to  follow  with  cheerfulness  and  alacrity  in  every 
measure  which  seeks  the  attainment  of  that  single  object  for  which 
we  have  come  together.  Let  us  work  in  the  spirit  of  infinite  for 
bearance.  Let  us  examine  our  own  hearts  and  see  whether  there  be 
any  alloy  in  the  golden  motives  which  should  actuate  our  efforts,  and 
if  there  be,  let  us  never  rest  until  it  be  utterly  consumed. 

Men  call  us  dreamers;  but  it  is  the  dream  of  this  generation  which 
shall  be  the  truth  of  history  in  generations  to  come.  Thus  has  it 
always  been,  and  thus  will  it  always  be.  Amid  the  corruptions  of 
declining  Rome,  men  dreamed  of  a  purer  deity  than  the  old  gods  of 
Greece.  m  Neither  the  tortures  of  Nero's  gardens  nor  the  flaming  eyes 
of  the  tigers  of  the  amphitheatre  could  stifle  the  spirit  of  these  dreams 
— dreams  that  were  born  in  the  darkness  of  the  catacombs,  dreams 
that  made  the  dreamers  brave  and  pure  and  just  amid  the  universal 
corruption  and  debauchery  around  them ;  dreams  that  rose  with  their 
pure  spirits  from  amid  the  circles  of  the  howling  amphitheatre,  and  led 
them  along  the  bright  path  of  the  sunlight  of  God's  love.  These  men 
dreamed,  and  lo!  the  new  faith  in  which  they  put  their  trust,  spread 
over  all  the  earth,  and  buried  beyond  hope  of  resurrection  the  darker 
superstitions  of  antiquity. 

A  sailor  of  Genoa  dreamed  of  a  great  ball  revolving  in  infinite 
space,  of  the  temples  and  palm  groves  of  India  across  the  blue  waters 
of  the  West,  of  a  benighted  and  unbelieving  world  to  whom  he  should 
carry  the  glad  tidings  of  God's  love.  Courtiers  repelled  him,  sage  doc 
tors  in  council  called  him  heretic.  Freighted  with  the  burden  of  that 
dream,  he  trudged  his  weary  way  from  land  to  land.  Then  the  heart 
of  a  woman,  pure  and  good,  was  made  a  sharer  in  that  dream,  and 
from  that  union  arose  a  progeny  of  fruitful  deeds.  When  we  look 
upon  the  treasures  which  the  civilisation  of  the  Western  Hemisphere 
has  poured  into  our  lap ;  and  as  we  glow  with  the  great  thought  of 
America,  the  liberty  that  enlightens  all  the  world, — let  us  ask  our- 


APPENDIX  II  241 

selves,  where  would  these  things  have  been  if  no  Columbus  had  dared 
to  dream  away  the  superstitions  of  the  centuries? 

We  can  hardly  remember  it  now,  but  there  was  a  time  that  we  our 
selves  have  seen  in  free  America,  when  in  this  very  city,  human  flesh 
was  sold  upon  the  auction  block ;  when  stripes  and  curses  were  the 
only  payment  offered  for  the  negro's  toil;  when  women  with  children 
at  the  breast  followed  for  days  and  weeks,  among  the  swamps  and 
morasses  of  the  South,  that  one  star,  the  star  of  the  North,  of  liberty ; 
the  only  friend  that  they  had  on  earth.  Then,  too,  men  dreamed; 
dreamed  of  the  time  when  this  great  curse  should  vanish.  In  season  and 
out  of  season  they  preached  their  gospel  of  emancipation.  They  were 
reviled  of  men;  the  jeers  of  the  populace,  the  hootings  of  the  mob, 
and  even  the  rope  of  the  hangman,  were  their  portion ;  but  the  flame  of 
war  passed  over  us,  and  the  curse  has  rolled  away. 

Garibaldi,  in  his  island  home,  dreamed  of  United  Italy;  and  lo! 
before  our  very  eyes  the  deed  is  done. 

And  men  dream  still.  Amid  the  snows  and  darkness  of  Siberian  win 
ters,  they  dream  of  that  liberty  for  whose  sake  they  wear  the  chains 
and  bear  the  stripes ;  dream  of  a  great  resurrection  of  holy  Russia, 
when  the  song  of  the  peasant  shall  no  longer  be  freighted  with  the 
sadness  which  generations  of  oppression  have  poured  into  its  cadences; 
and  where  even  to  them  shall  be  given  some  measure  of  the 
right  to  make  the  laws  which  they  must  obey.  And  their  dream,  too, 
shall  become  a  living  reality. 

And  woman,  too,  has  dreamed,  dreamed  of  the  time  when,  equal  with 
her  brother  in  the  last  jot  and  tittle  of  every  civil,  social,  and  political 
right,  she  should  have  the  power  to  exercise  jointly  with  him  that  right 
of  sovereignty,  that  right  of  suffrage,  upon  which  the  security  for 
every  other  right  depends.  Already  half  the  prayer  is  granted.  One 
by  one  the  barriers  of  legal  incapacity  have  been  thrown  down,  and 
the  gate  of  many  an  avenue  to  honour  and  wealth  and  profit,  which 
had  been  closed  against  her,  now  yields  to  the  pressure  of  a  woman's 
hand. 

The  great  work  goes  on  slowly  and  steadily  to  its  accomplishment 
The  little  reverses  which  come  from  time  to  time,  such  as  the  denial 
of  suffrage  in  the  State  of  Washington,  are  only  the  exceptions  which 
serve  to  show  more  clearly  the  general  drift  of  the  tide.  Shall  we 
believe  that  these  are  permanent  obstacles?  We  might  as  well  say 
that  the  Mississippi  will  not  reach  the  sea,  because  there  are  eddies  in 
the  current.  The  progress  of  humanity  is  certain.  It  will  not  stop 
until  man  and  woman  are  equal  in  every  right  before  the  law,  and 
government  everywhere  derives  its  just  powers  from  the  consent  of 
the  governed. 


INDEX 


Absolute,   Sir  Anthony,   role   of, 

4i 

Ad  Patriam,  poem,  100 

Adams,  Charles  R,  protest  against 
Russian  treaty,  96 

Adams  monument  in  Rock  Creek 
Cemetery,  discussed  with  St. 
Gaudens,  136,  137 

Addresses  at  Canton  and  Gettys 
burg,  13? 

Adler,  Felix,  at  Tuesday  Club, 
56;  anecdote  of,  87;  invites  ad 
dress  on  Proportional  Repre 
sentation,  93 

Agamemnon  of  JEschylus,  prize 
examination  on,  12 

Agnostics,  complaints  of  appoint 
ments  of,  120 

Alabama  Claims,  Sumner  on,  56 
to  59 

Aldrich,  Thos.  B.,  resents  raillery 
on  Boston,  64  to  66 

American  Woman's  Suffrage 
Assn.,  85 

Ananias  Club,  gossip  on  Roose 
velt,  147  to  150 

Anderson,  Indiana  speech  at,  on 
preparedness,  200 

Andromache,  role  of,  in  Trojan 
Women,  41 

Anthon,  Prof.  Chas.,  8,  9 

Anthony,  Susan  B.,  85,  86 

Anti-Imperialism,   107 

Anti-Slavery  movement,  100 

Anti-Slavery  Society,  dissolution 
of,  101 

Antiques  in  Richmond  home,  31, 
32 

Arbitration,  international,   180 

Art  Association  of  Richmond, 
Ind.,  35  to  37 

Atlantic  Monthly,  article  in,  on 
Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle, 
206,  207 

Austria,  at  outbreak  of  war,  TOO, 
191 

Autobiography,  discussion  of,  I, 
2;  stanza,  i 


243 


Baddeck,  135 

Ballinger,  Richard  A.,  157 

Bar,  examination  for,  14 

Barnard,  F.  A.  P.,  9,  10,  n,  222 

Beach,  candidate  for  Federal 
judge,  147  to  150 

Beecher  trial,  speech  of  W.  A. 
Beach  in,  28 

Belgium,  in  the  war,  193,  194 

Bemis,  George,  author  of  Sum 
ner' s  Memoirs,  59,  60 

Bennett,  General  Tom,  44 

Bickle,  Col.,  44,  45 

Bicycle,  learning  to  ride,  215,  216 

Bigelow,  John,  207 

Blackstone's  definition  of  a  court, 

14 

Blackwell,  Henry  B.,  85 
Elaine,  James  G.,  charges  against, 

74,    75 ;    attractive    personality, 

103,  104 
Bloomfield,  home  in,  18 ;  burglars, 

18,  19 
Bonaparte,   Charles   J.,   President 

National  Municipal  League,  98; 

letter  on  Panama  treaty,  126 
Boston,  meeting  of  Civil  Service 

Reform  League,  65,  66;  Reform 

Club,  speech  at,  106 
Breshkovsky,  Catherine,  96,  97 
Brown,  Jason   B.,   State   senator, 

72 ;  Brown  bill,  74 
Bryan,   W.   J.,    "Cross    of    Gold" 

speech,  105;  speech  at  Chicago 

conference    on    trusts,    171    to 

173 ;     Democratic     Convention, 

173;  defeated  by  McKinley,  173 
Bunau,  Varilla,  125 
Burchenal,  C.  H.,  48,  49 
Burning  a  wreck,  215 
Business  experiences,  217 


Calaveras  grove  of  big  trees,  17 
California,  visit  to,  16,  17 
Cambon,  Jules,  218 
Campaign    for   State    Senate,   70, 
71 ;  Federal,  1916,  167  to  169 


244 


INDEX 


Cannon,  Joseph,  speaker,  opposed 

by  insurgents,  152 
Carnegie,   Andrew,   on   prepared 
ness,    199,   200 

Carter,  James  C,  President  Mu 
nicipal  League,  98 
Centennial  Ode,  Indiana,  1916,  30, 

179 

Century,     The,     account     in,     of 
Morton's  mission  to  France,  207 
Chapman,  J.  J.,  criticises  Roose 
velt,  112,  113 

Chase,  Wm.  M.,  artist,  36,  37 
Chicago,  address  to  Indiana  So 
ciety  of,  63,  64,  227  to  232 ;  Re 
publican  and  Progressive  con 
ventions  of  1912,  in,  160  to  163 ; 
of  1916,  167,  168;  conference  on 
trusts  in  1899,  170  to  176;  in 
1907,  174 

Children  of  Liberty   (verse),   190 
Childs,     Richard     S.,     President 
Proportional         Representation 
League,  94 

Choate,  Rufus,  his  manner  of  ar 
guing  cases,  53 
Cincinnati   Times-Star,  article  in, 

.T55 

Citizens'  League  criticises  Roose 
velt,  112,  113 

City   and   State,  criticises   Roose 
velt,  112 
City  government,   manager   form 

of,  221 
Civic   Federation,   Conference  on 

trusts,  176,  178 
Civil  Service  Bill  in  State  Senate, 

77 

Civil  Service  Commission,  ap 
pointed  to,  108,  109,  113;  resign 
from,  138 

Civil   Service   Reform,  87  to   89, 

^22 1 ;   reminiscences  of,  210,  211 

Civil     Service     Reform     League, 

Boston  meeting,  65,  66 
Clark,    Dr.     Alonzo,   prescription 

for  tuberculosis,  16 
Cleveland,  Grover,  75,  77;  re 
movals  by,  on  secret  charges, 
88;  his  second  administration, 
105;  Venezuela  message,  57  to 
60 

Cleveland  and  Harrison  cam 
paigns,  104 

Club,  Liberal,  New  York,  15,  16; 
Jekyl  Island,  63 


Clubs,  in  Indiana,  35,  37,  5$,  62, 
03;  m  Washington,  134  to  136 

Cockran,  W.  Bourke,  speech  of,  at 
Chicago  Trust  Conference,  171 

College,  Columbia,  8  to  13; 
pranks,  10,  11,  13;  politics,  n, 
12;  honours,  12;  law  school,  13, 
14 

Collins,  Pat,  mayor  of  Boston,  65 

Colombia,  and  Panama  revolution, 
123  to  126 

Columbia  Law  School,  13,  14 

Columbiad,  12 

Commerce  Department,  estab 
lished,  174 

Communism  in  Russia,  222 

Connecticut  judge,  Roosevelt's 
appointment  of,  147  to  150 

Conscience,  curious  operations  of, 
219 

Conscientious  objectors,  202 

Conscription  Board,  201  to  203 

Conservation  controversies,  157 

Constitutional  Convention,  Ohio, 
159 

Convention  of  1912,  Republican, 
160,  161 ;  Progressive,  161  to 
163;  of  1916,  Republican  and 
Progressive,  167,  168 

Corporations,  Bureau  of,  174 

Cortelyou,  Secretary  to  President 
Roosevelt,  and  Secret  Service 
men,  119 

Covenant  of  League  of  Nations, 
186  to  189 

Cox,  Geo.  B.,  boss  of  Cincinnati, 
supports  Taft,  159 

Creek  Indians,  frauds  on,  138  to 
142 

Crowder,  Provost-Marshal  Gen 
eral,  201 

Curtis,  George  Wm.,  88 

Davies  and  Work,  firm  of,  19 
Davis,  J.  C.  Bancroft,  on  Sumner 
and  Alabama  Claims,  56  to  59 
Death,  reflections  on,  224,  225 
Democratic  platform  of  1912  and 

performance,  164 
Dewey,  Admiral,  change  of  feel 
ing  toward,  132 
Doctor  of  Laws  degree,  68,  69 
Dog,  intelligence  of,  137,  138 
Dogberry,      Congress      compared 

with,  122,  123 
Dorothy  Day,  novel,  3,  210 


INDEX 


245 


Dramatic  interests,  41 

Dreamers,  240,  241 

Drew,  Daniel,  service  of  summons 
on,  20 

Drisler,  Professor  Henry,  re 
writes  Greek  salutatory,  12 

Dwight,  Dr.  Theodore,  head  of 
Columbia  law  school,  13,  14 

Earlham  College,  33,  67;  open  air 
stage  in,  41 ;  lecture  at,  on  Rus 
sian  literature,  68;  degree  con 
ferred  by,  68,  69 ;  peace  meeting 
at,  179 

Early  political  affiliations,  100  to 
103 

Eaton,  Dorman  B.,  leader  in  Civil 
Service  Reform,  88 

Ekkehard,  views  of  Hunnish 
chiefs  on  Philosophy,  222,  223 

El  Paso,  collectorship,  120 

Eliot,  Dr.  Charles,  President  of 
Harvard,  speech  at  Boston 
Civil  Service  meeting,  65 

England's  early  attitude  toward 
the  World  War,  195,  196 

English    constitution,     "crescive," 

14 
English  Opera  House,  speech  in, 

106 

Evening  Item,  Richmond,  204 
Exemptions    from    military    duty, 

202 
Expert  City  Management,  address 

on,  98 

Fairbanks,  C.  W.,  candidate  for 
President,  1908,  150;  sustainer 
of  Indiana  journalism,  230,  231 

Family,  the,  41 

Faneuil  Hall,  meeting  of  Friends 
of  Russian  Freedom  at,  96,  97 

Federal  Trade  Commission,  177 

Fiction,  Masterpieces  of  the  Mas 
ters  of,  210 

Fifteenth  Amendment,  Roose 
velt's  views  on,  134 

Fighting   the   Spoilsmen,  210,   21 1 

Fish,  Hamilton,  and  Alabama 
claims,  56  to  59 

Fishback,  W.  P.,  letter  from,  on 
Life  of  Morton,  206,  207 

Foote  vs.  Middletown  Insane 
Asylum,  18 

Foulke,  Edward  and  Eleanor,  3; 


Joseph,  5;  Thomas,  I,  3;  Han 
nah  S.,  3 

Fox,  George,  founder  of  Quaker 
ism,  4 

Fox  Hunt  in  Indiana,  39,  40 

Frankfort-on-the-Main,  govern 
ment  of,  98 

Free  Trade   League,  member  of, 

102 

Friends  of  Russian  Freedom,  96, 

97 

Friends'    Seminary,   3 

Friends,  Society  of,  3  to  6;  in 
Richmond,  Ind.,  33 ;  birthright 
member  of,  219;  principles,  219, 
220 ;  conduct  in  World  War,  202 

Funeral  of  Captain  Y.,   I 

Garfield,  James  A.,  supported  in 
campaign,  102 

Garfield,  James  R.,  succeeded  by 
Ballinger,  157 

Garrison,  Secretary  of  War, 
resignation  of,  166 

Gaynor,  Wm.  J.,  debate  with,  on 
Proportional  Representation,  9.3 

German  Emperor  wanted  Roose 
velt  to  neutralise  Yangtze  Val 
ley,  125,  126 

German  legislation  on  trusts,   176 

Germany  warned  after  sinking 
Lusitania,  diplomatic  corre 
spondence  with,  166;  scenes  in, 
at  outbreak  of  war,  190  to  195 

Gerrymander,  90 

Gettysburg,  address  at,  137 

Gilman,  President  Civil  Service 
League,  speaks  at  Boston,  65 

Golden  mean,  the,  224 

Gordon,  J.  B.,  editor  Richmond 
Item,  204 

Gossip  against  Roosevelt  in  1910, 
131  to  133 

Greek,  in  college,  9 ;  prize,  12 

Greek  letter  societies,  n  ;  saluta 
tory  poem,  12 

Greeley,  Horace,  at  the  Liberal 
Club,  eccentricities  of,  15,  16; 
nominated  by  Liberal  Repub 
licans,  102 

Greenbackers,  attack  by,  in  cam 
paign  for  State  Senate,  70,  71 

Hadley,  President  of  Yale,  on 
Connecticut  judgeship  case,  148 
to  150 


246 


INDEX 


Hanna,  Mark,  talked  of  as  candi 
date  in  1904,  143 

Hanna,  Thomas,  Lieut.-Governor 
of  Indiana,  71 

Happiness  (sonnet),  213;  how 
promoted,  223 

Harrison,  General  Benjamin,  ad 
dress  to  jury  in  will  case,  49, 
50;  his  view  of  Venezuela  Arbi 
tration,  59;  deserted  by  "mug 
wumps,"  60,  106;  receives  certi 
ficate  of  character  from  Lit 
erary  Club,  63 ;  candidacy  of,  in 
1888  and  1892,  104;  attitude  to 
ward  Civil  Service,  104 

Hatton,  Frank,  publishes  charges 
against  Roosevelt,  in  Washing 
ton  Post,  in 

Hatton,  Prof.  A.  R.,  in  Propor 
tional  Representation  League, 

94 
Hay,    John,    Secretary    of    State, 

at  White   House   Sundays,   123 
Hay-Herran  treaty,   124 
Hayes,  Rutherford  B.,  campaign, 

102 
Heart   disease,    cross-examination 

of   physicians   regarding,  21   to 

23 
Hendricks,     Thos.     A.,     opposes 

"schoolmaster    plan"    for    Civil 

Service        appointments,        77; 

Roosevelt's  views  on,  134 
Hickok's    Empirical    Psychology, 

222 

History  of  the  Langobards,  209, 
210 

Hitchcock,  Secretary  Interior,  138 

Hitt,  R.  R.,  on  Morton's  mission 
to  Louis  Napoleon,  207 

Hoag,  C.  G.,  secretary  Propor 
tional  Representation  League, 

94 

Hoar,  Senator  at  Unitarian  con 
ference,  61 

Holt,  Hamilton,  in  League  to  En 
force  Peace,  182 
"Honesty  racket,"  131 
Hoosier  ways,  dialect,  etc.,  35 
Hopkins,  Mark,  reflections  on  old 

age,  216 

Horseback  riding  and  leaping,  114 
Howard,  General  O.  O.,  at  Tues 
day  Club,  61 

Howe,  Mrs.  Julia  Ward,  in  Amer 
ican  Woman's  Suffrage  Asso 


ciation,  85;  speak  with  at  St. 
Paul,  86,  87;  on  Russian  free 
dom,  97 

Hughes,  Chas.  E.,  President  Na 
tional  Municipal  League,  99; 
nomination  and  defeat  for  the 
Presidency,  167  to  169 

Hunnish  chieftain's  views  on 
philosophy,  222,  223 

Icelandic  library,  205 

In  medio  tutissimus  ibis,  224 

Indiana,  removal  to,  29;  life  in, 
30  to  54;  Centennial  Ode  to, 
30 ;  charm  of,  34,  35 ;  painting 
in,  id;  fox  hunt,  39;  literature, 
35;  landscape,  34;  clubs,  55  to 
67;  poetry  of,  212;  self-made 
men,  biographies  of,  228;  litera 
ture  and  statesmanship  of,  230; 
journalism  of,  230,  231 ;  finance 
in,  231;  jurisprudence  of,  231 

Indiana  Bar,  the,  42  to  50;  re 
tirement  from,  51 

Indiana  Senate,  71  to  83 

Indiana  Society  of  Chicago,  63, 
64;  speech  before,  227  to  232 

Indiana's  Output,  address  at  In 
diana  Society  of  Chicago,  64, 
227  to  232 

Independents  oppose  Roosevelt 
for  Governor,  in  to  113 

Indianapolis    Literary    Club,   62 

Indian  frauds  investigated  at 
Muskogee,  138  to  142 

Indians,  truthful  witnesses,  142 

Individualism  vs.  collectivism, 
222 

"Inner  Light,"  4  to  6,  219 

Insane  Hospital,  at  Richmond, 
73;  ^at  Indianapolis,  partisan 
politics  in,  74 

Insurgent  Republicans,  152 

Intercollegiate  Peace  Association, 
address  at,  179 

International  Court,  180  to  182, 
221 ;  not  provided  in  League  of 
Nations  Covenant,  188 

Investigation  of  State  Treasury 
by  Senate,  78  to  81 

Item,  the  Richmond,  204 

Jacksons,  the,  37,  38 

Jefferson,  Thos.,  on  re-election  of 

Presidents,  163 
Jekyl  Island  Club,  64  to  67 


INDEX 


247 


Jews,  anecdotes  of,  in  lawsuits, 
24  to  27 

Johnson,  Andrew,  sends  Morton 
to  Louis  Napoleon,  207,  208 

Johnson,  Henry  U.,  defends  T. 
J.  Study  in  assault  case,  47 

Johnston,  Mrs.  M.  F.,  35 

Journalism,  204 

Judicial  Settlement  of  Interna 
tional  Disputes,  Society  for,  182 

Julian,  Geo.  W.,  discussion  on 
Sumner  at  Tuesday  Club,  56  to 
60 

Justiciable  Controversies,  183,  184 

Kaiser  Wilhelm,  Roosevelt's  opin 
ion  of,  133 

Kelly,  Robert  L.,  President  Earl- 
ham  College  confers  degree,  68 

Kennan,  Geo.,  letter  on  Russian 
treaty,  96;  in  Washington  lit 
erary  society  and  at  Baddeck, 

135 

Kern,  John  W.,  Senator,  on  pre 
paredness,  197 
Kibbey,  Judge,  J.  R,  45 
Knight  case  on  Trusts,  172,  173 
Knights    of    the    Golden    Circle, 
article  on,  207. 

Landis,  Kenesaw  M.,  judge,  fines 
Standard  Oil  Co.,  231 

Langobards,  History  of,  209,  210 

Law  Practice,  in  New  York,  19 
to  28 ;  in  Indiana,  42  to  51 ;  re 
flections  on,  in  New  York,  23, 
24;  in  Indiana,  51  to  54 

League  of  Nations  and  covenant, 
185  to  189,  221 

League  to  Enforce  Peace,  and 
correspondence  with  Roosevelt 
on,  183  to  186 

Legislation    of    1883,    futility    of, 

74 

Lewis,    Wm.     Draper,    chairman 
resolutions    committee    in    Pro 
gressive  Convention,   162 
Liberal  Club,  New  York,  15,  16 
Liberal      Republican      movement, 

102 

Liberty,  involved  in  Suffrage,  235 
Lieber,   Dr.   Francis,  lectures  ^  by, 
at  law  school,  and  eccentricities 
of,  14 

Life  in  Washington,  109  to  142 
Life's  Evening  (sonnet),  225 


Lincoln,  Life  of,  by  Nicolay  and 
Hay,  read  by  Roosevelt,  129, 
130 

Linden  Hill,  primitive  organisa 
tion  of,  33,  34 

Literary  Club,   Indianapolis,  62 

Literary  Interests,  204  to  212 

Literary  Society,  Washington, 
I3S,  136 

Lloyd,  Henry  Demarest,  at  New 
York  Liberal  Club,  15 

Lodge,  Henry  Cabot,  attitude  to 
ward  Civil  Service  Reform,  no 

Long  Branch,  residence  in,  6,  7 

Lowell,  A.  Lawrence,  in  League 
to  Enforce  Peace,  182  to  184 

Lusitania,  166,  196 

"Lyrics  of  War  and  Peace,"  212 


Macbeth,  acting  in,  41 

Magee,  Rufus,  State  Senator,  72, 
80 

Malocsay,  Francis,  partnership 
with,  19 

Manchuria,  intervention  in,  dis 
cussed  by  Roosevelt,  125 

Manson,  General  M.  D.,  President 
of  Senate,  76,  77 

Marburg,  Theodore,  in  League  to 
Enforce  Peace,  182 

Marriage,  17,  18 

Married  life,   18 

Marroquin,  President  of  Colom 
bia,  124 

Masterpieces  of  the  Masters  of 
Fiction,  210 

Matterhorn-climbing  near  Wash 
ington,  116  to  118 

Maya,  a  romance  of  Yucatan, 
208;  a  lyric  drama  of  Yucatan, 

211 

McCullough,  State  Senator  in 
Treasury,  79,  81 

McKinley,  at  Jekyl  Island,  64; 
Bryan  campaign,  105;  charac 
teristics,  id;  course  in  Spanish 
War,  106,  107;  death,  108 

Metaphysics  unsatisfactory,  222, 
223 

Mexico,  Morton's  mission  to  se 
cure  evacuation  of  French 
troops  from,  207 

Miller,  butler  and  coachman,  137, 
138 

Middle  course,  best,  224 


248 


INDEX 


Miliukoff,      Prof.,      in      Russian 

Duma,  97 
Mill,  John  Stuart,  drift  from  his 

philosophy,  222;  on  government 

by  Indian  princesses,  239 
Mitchell,  Dr.  Weir,  64,  65 
Mob  psychology,  102,  103 
Model  City  Charter,  98,  99 
Monroe  Doctrine,  184,  188 
Morley,  John,  on  Kaiser,  133 
Morton,  Oliver  P.,  Life  of,  205  to 

207;     criticised    by    Roosevelt, 

133,  134 
Morton,  Oliver  T.,  son  of  above, 

205 
Mott,  Lucretia,  Quaker  minister, 

5 

Mountaineering,  214 
Mugwumps,    paper    on,    6or    61 ; 

criticised  by  Roosevelt,  133,  134 
Municipal  League,  97  to  99 
Municipal  programme,  98,  99 
Murdock     of     Kansas,     supports 

President    Wilson's    neutrality, 

198 
Muskogee,    Investigation,    138   to 

142 

Napoleon  III,  O.  P.  Morton's 
mission  to,  207 

Napoleonder,  by  Kennan,  135 

National  American  Woman  Suf 
frage  Association,  85,  86;  ad 
dress  at  opening,  233  to  241 

National  Municipal  League,  97  to 

99 

Nauheim,  at  outbreak  of  war,  190 
Nebraska,  summer  in,  16;  Indian 

trial  in,  17 

Negro,  toleration  toward,  82,  83 
Neutralisation  of  territories,  180 
New  Madison,  Ohio,  speech  at, 

102,  103 

Nicolay  and  Hay's  Life  of  Lin 
coln,  129,  130 
Norton    letter    concerning    Taft, 

Noyes,  appointed  Judge  by 
Roosevelt,  149,  i5o 

Office  boy,  George,  19  to  21 
Old  age,  216 
Olney,  Richard  S.,  65 
Oratory,  in  State  Legislature,  79 
to  82 


Page,  Thos.  Nelson,  64 

Palladium,  Richmond,  204 

Panama  Canal,  discussed  by 
Roosevelt,  123,  124 

Parker,  Alton  B.,  nominated,  143 ; 
unimpressive  campaign,  145 ;  in 
League  to  Enforce  Peace,  182 

Partisanship,  in  State  Senate,  73, 
74 

Paul  the  Deacon,  criticised  by 
Roosevelt,  134;  translation  of, 
209,  210,  230 

Peace,  preliminary  organisation 
for  securing,  179  to  182;  League 
to  Enforce,  182  to  186 

Peck,  Prof,  of  Mathematics,  pe 
culiarities  of,  eloquent  demon 
stration  by,  9 

Perkins,  Geo.  W.,  letter  to,  on 
1916  convention,  167;  on  pre 
paredness,  198,  199 

Perry,  Judge,  43,  44 

Personal  associations  at  Indiana 
bar,  48  to  51 

Petrarch,   Some   Love   Songs   of, 

211,   212 

Philippine  Question,  107 

Phillips,  Wendell,  100 

Philolexian  society,  13 

Philosophy  of  Life,  222  to  224 

Pinchot,  Gifford,  at  White  House 
Sunday  evenings,  123 ;  removed 
by  Taft,  157;  at  Progressive 
convention,  162 

Poetry,  various  works  in,  211, 
212 ;  futurist,  212 

Political  activities,  100  to  108 

Porter,  Governor  A.  G.,  recom 
mends  Treasury  investigation, 
78,80 

Practical  precepts  for  life,  223, 
224 

Preparation  for  World  War,  165, 
166;  efforts  to  secure  prepared 
ness,  196  to  201 

Presidents,  re-election  of,  163 

Procter,  John  R.,  ride?  with,  114; 
at  White  House  Sundays, 
123 

Progressive  movement,  151  to 
169;  convention  and  campaign 
of  1912,  161  to  163 ;  platform  of 
1912,  162;  1916  campaign,  167, 
168;  apathy  on  preparedness, 
197  to  200;  dinner  at  Indianapo 
lis  January  1915,  199 


INDEX 


249 


Progressives  aroused  at  last,  201 ; 
deprived  of  patronage  by  Taft, 

157 

Progressives  (sonnet),  151 
Proportional     Representation,    89 

to  94;  arguments  for,  89  to  92; 

League,  93,  94;   Review,  93 
Protean  Papers,  209 
Public  Opinion  as  a  sanction  for 

international  court,  180,  181 
Public  Questions,  84  to  99 
Purdy,     Lawson,     President    Na 
tional  Municipal  League,  99 
Putnam,    Herbert,    129;    Literary 

Club,  135;   Round  Table  Club, 

136 

Quaker  Boy,  The,  210 
Quaker  City  of  the  West,  33 
Quakers,  3  to  5 
Quay,  M.  S.,   131 

Railroad  law  practice,  47,  48 

Railsback,  Jehiej,  38 

Recall  of  decisions  and  judges, 
159,  160 

Reed,  Rev.  Myron  W.,  on  In 
dianapolis  Literary  Club,  62 

Reed,  Thos.,  Speaker,  no 

Reeves,  Arthur  M.,  204,  205 

Reeves,  Mark  E.,  17 

Reeveston,  33 

Reflections  on  law  practice,  51  to 
54;  on  life,  222  to  228 

Rempubllcam   Ad    (stanza),    170 

Representation  of  women,  in 
government,  237,  238 

Republican  Convention  of  1912, 
frauds  in,  160,  161 ;  convention 
of  1916,  167,  168 

Retrospect,  221,  222 

Rhodes'  history  of  U.  S.,  criti 
cised  by  Roosevelt,  134 

Richmond,  Ind.,  removal  to,  and 
home  in,  29  to  34 ;  town  de 
scribed,  33,  34;  Art  Association 
of,  35  to  37;  local  colour,  37, 
38;  home  guard,  38,  39;  literary 
fertility  of,  227 

Rides  and  walks  with  the  Presi 
dent,  113  to  119 

Riis,  Jacob,  story  of  Roosevelt 
and  coal  strike,  131 

Riley,  James  Whitcomb,  63;  son 
net  to,  55 ;  opposed  to  new 
school  of  poetry,  212 


Riverhead,  trial  at,  21  to  23 

Rives,  Geo.  L.,  13 

Robinson,  Mrs.  Douglas,  132 

Roosevelt,  Theodore,  early  recol 
lections  of,  no  to  113;  as 
Civil  Service  Commissioner, 
no,  in;  investigated  by  Con 
gress,  id;  his  home  in  Wash 
ington,  id;  candidate  for  gov 
ernor,  in  to  113;  letter  from, 
on  governorship  campaign,  112, 
113;  becomes  Vice  President, 
108;  rides  and  walks  with, 
when  President,  113  to  119; 
other  personal  incidents,  120  to 
126;  giving  advice  to,  121,  122; 
on  Ananias  Club,  id ;  charac 
teristics,  127  to  134;  leadership, 
127;  devotion  and  love  of  his 
friends,  and  rage  of  his  ene 
mies,  id ;  sympathy  with  plain 
people,  127,  128;  joy  of  living, 
128;  sense  of  humour,  id; 
hard  and  speedy  worker,  128, 
129;  voracious  reader,  129,  130; 
primitive  type,  130;  practical, 
id;  love  of  fair  play,  id;  not 
erratic,  id;  views  on  negro 
question,  and  on  Fifteenth 
Amendment,  134;  on  coal  strike, 
131;  toward  Platt  and  Quay, 
id;  on  labour,  id;  Washington 
gossip  on,  131,  132;  his  esti 
mate  of  crowned  heads,  133; 
literary  criticisms  by,  133,  134; 
campaign  of  1904,  143  to  146; 
sonnet  on,  143 ;  makes  peace  be 
tween  Russia  and  Japan,  146; 
supports  Taft  in  1908,  id; 
charged  with  coercing  em 
ployees,  id ;  exonerated  by 
Civil  Service  League,  146,  147 ; 
answers  charges  of  abuse  of 
patronage  in  Noyes  judgeship 
case  in  Conn.,  147  to  150;  his 
policies  ignored  by  Taft,  151, 
152,  157,  158;  return  from 
Africa,  157 ;  urges  friends  not 
to  break  with  Taft,  157,  158; 
becomes  candidate  1912,  158; 
"ingratitude"  to  Taft,  id;  con 
troversy  with  Taft  158  to  161 ; 
Columbus  speech,  recall  of  de 
cisions  and  judges,  159,  160;  in 
Progressive  convention  and 
campaign  of  1912,  161,  162;  on 


250 


INDEX 


third  term,  163;  in  convention 
and  campaign  of  1916,  168;  ex 
treme  hostility  to  Wilson,  168, 
169 ;  views  on  question  of  the 
trusts,  176;  on  League  to  En 
force  Peace,  183,  184;  corre 
spondence  with,  on  prepared 
ness,  198,  199;  arouses  coun 
try  to  prepare,  199;  offer  of 
service  to  in  World  War,  201 ; 
his  death,  221 

Roosevelt  and  Taft  campaigns, 
143  to  150 

Round  Robin  of  Taft,  Root  and 
Knox,  122 

Round  Table  Club,  Washington, 
136 

Rowell,  Chester,  162 

Russia  at  outbreak  of   war,   191, 

193 

Russian  diplomacy,  Roosevelt  on, 
124  to  126 

Russian  literature,  episode  at 
lecture  on,  68 

Russian  question,  94  to  97 ;  ex 
tradition  treaty,  95,  96;  errone 
ous  views  on,  221,  222;  com 
munism,  222 

Rupe,  John   L.,  48 

Sanction  for  international  tribu 
nals,  180,  181 

Sayre,  Warren  G.,  on  Treasury 
Investigation,  78,  79 

Schmidt,   Professor,  9,   10 

Schurz,  Carl,  in  National  Civil 
Service  League,  65,  88;  on 
Anti-Imperialism,  107 ;  criti 
cised  by  Roosevelt,  134;  open 
letter  against  Roosevelt,  144; 
criticism  for  supporting  Bryan, 

145 
Scrimmage,  45  to  47 

Scudder,  Janet,  bronze  by,  at  Art 
Association,  37 

Secret  Service  guards  of  Roose 
velt,  119 

Senate,  of  Indiana,  70  to  83 

Senate  (Federal)  not  consulted 
on  League  of  Nations,  188,  189 

Servia,  at  outbreak  of  war,  190, 
191 

Session  of  1883,  in  State  Senate, 
71  to  74;  session  of  1885,  74  to  83 

Seymour,  Horatio,  Roosevelt's 
view  of,  134 


Shoemaker,   Abraham,   3 
Shoemaker,  Margaret,  3 
Siddall,  Jesse  P.,  29,  43 
Siddall  and  Foulke,  47,  48 
Simpson,  Bishop,  sermon  by,  7,  8 
Slav  and  Saxon,  94,  95 ;  mistake 

in,  221,  222 

Sobieski,  John,  Life  of,  129 

Socialistic  drift  of  the  world,  222 

Sovereignty  and  suffrage,  237,  238 

Spann,  Jesse  J.,  State  Senator,  72 

Speck  von  Sternberg,  125 

Spencer,  Herbert,  drift  away 
from  his  philosophy,  222 

Spofford,  A.  W.,   135 

Sports,  214,  215 

Springfield  Republican,  Bona 
parte's  letter  to,  on  Panama 
treaty,  126 

St.  Gaudens,  Augustus,  on  Adams 
monument,  136,  137 

Standard  Oil  Co.,  172,  174 

Sterne,  Simon,  president  N.  Y. 
Proportional  Representation 
Society,  93 

Stone,  Lucy,  85 

Storey,  Moorfield,  Anti-Imperial 
ist,  107 

Straus,  Oscar  S.,  in  League  to 
Enforce  Peace,  182;  his  esti 
mate  of  Roosevelt,  127 

Study,  Thos.  J.,  45  to  47 

Sugar  Trust  case,  172 

Sumner,  Chas.,  in  Alabama  Arbi 
tration  case,  and  his  removal 
from  Foreign  Relations  Com 
mittee,  56  to  60 

Sunday  evenings  at  White  House, 
123  to  126 

Supreme  Court  as  model  for  in 
ternational  Court,  181 ;  sanction 
of,  id 

Sussex,  sunk  by  German  subma 
rine,  166 

Swarthmore  College,  69 

Swift,  Lucius  B.,  at  Tuesday 
Club,  55;  investigation  of  Fed 
eral  Civil  Service,  with,  88; 
visit  to  Oyster  Bay  with,  133, 
i57,  158 

Taft,  Chas.  P.,  editor  Times  Star, 

155 

Taft,  William  H.,  regarding  Civil 
Service  Reform,  89;  campaign 
of  1908,  146  to  150;  elected 


INDEX 


251 


President,  151 ;  ignores  Roose 
velt's  policies,  151,  152,  157, 
158;  Cabinet  changes  made  by, 
152;  correspondence  with  re 
garding  Cannon,  152,  153;  re 
garding  Payne-Aldrich  bill,  154 
to  156;  on  Winona  speech,  154, 
155;  letter  to  Lucius  B.  Swift, 
156;  deprives  Progressives  of 
patronage,  157;  Norton  letter, 
id ;  appoints  Ballinger,  id ;  re 
moves  Pinchot,  id ;  relations  to 
wards  bosses,  159;  controversy 
with  Roosevelt,  158  to  161 ;  at 
titude  toward  Trusts,  in  cam 
paign  with  Bryan,  174;  recom 
mends  their  voluntary  incor 
poration,  175;  president  of 
League  to  Enforce  Peace,  182, 
183 
Tammany  machine  methods,  217, 

218 

Tariff,  Payne-Aldrich,  152  to  155 
Tarkington,  Booth,  229,  230 
The  Muse  and  I,  204 
Third  term  question,  162,  163 
Tilden,   Samuel  J.,  campaign,  102 
Today     and     Yesterday,     poems, 

212 

Toleration  toward  negro,  82,  83 
Trade  Commission,  Federal,  177 
Treasury  Investigation  by  State 

Senate,  78  to  81 
Trojan  Women,  The,  41 
Trusts,  the,  170  to  178;  voluntary 
incorporation  of,  175 ;  Canadian 
law,   175,   176;    German   regula 
tions,    176;    remedies    for,    176, 
177;    Federal    Trade    Commis 
sion,  177 

Tuesday  Club,  56  to  62 
Turpie,  David,  senator,  on  Russian 

treaty,  95,  96 
Tweed,    regime   overthrown,    101, 

IO2 

Uchida,      Japanese      ambassador, 

132 

Underground  Railroad,  3,  100 
Unitarian  Conference,  address,  61 

Vallandigham,     Roosevelt's    view 

of,  134. 

Van  Amringe,  Professor,  10 
Venezuela,  message  of  Cleveland 

on,  57  to  59 


Vexations,  how  to  avoid,  223 
Voluntary  incorporation  of  trusts, 

175 
Von  Scheffel's  Ekkehard,  222,  223 


Wake,  Henry  M.,  president  of 
National  Municipal  League,  99 

Walks  and  rides  with  Roosevelt, 
113  to  119 

Wanamaker,  John,  in 

Washington's  Birthday,  speech  on 
preparedness,  200 

Washington,  life  in,  109  to  138 

Washington  gossip  against  Roose 
velt,  131  to  133 

Washington  Literary  Society,  135 

Washington,  George,  on  re-elec 
tion  of  Presidents,  163 

Wealth,  dangers  of  concen 
trated,  177,  178 

Weekly  News,  Richmond,  attacks 
in,  70,  71 

Wells,  David  A.,  215     , 

Welsh,  Herbert,  112 

Western  Association  of  Writers, 
62,  63 

Western  Economics  Society,  ad 
dress  at  Chicago  to,  177 

Whims  and  Fancies,  213  to  216 

White,  Wm.  Allen,   162 

Wilson,  Woodrow,  attitude  to 
ward  Civil  Service  Reform,  89; 
elected  President,  163;  his  first 
administration,  164  to  166;  con 
venes  Congress,  164;  announces 
policies,  id;  ignores  platform, 
id ;  foreign  policy,  165 ;  delays 
preparation  for  war,  165,  166; 
accepts  Garrison's  resignation, 
166;  Roosevelt's  opposition  to, 
168,  169 ;  attitude  on  League  to 
Enforce  Peace,  185 ;  on  League 
of  Nations,  185  to  189;  his  neu 
trality  policy,  196,  199;  his 
Jackson  Day  speech  at  Indian 
apolis,  199 ;  at  last  advocates 
preparedness,  200 

Wineland  the  Good,  20-5 

Winnebago  Indians,  trial  of,  17 

Winona  speech  by  Taft,  154,  155 

Woman  Suffrage,  84  to  86;  ad 
dress  to  National  American 
Woman  Suffrage  Association, 
233  to  241 

Womankind  (stanza),  84 


252  INDEX 

Woman's    capacity    for    govern-  Yangtze  Valley,  guaranty  of,  125 

ment,  239  Yosemite  valley,  17 

Woman's  sphere,  236,  237  Young,  General,  114 

Woodruff,  C.  W.,  secretary  Mu-  Yucatan,    Maya,    a    romance    of, 

nicipal  League,  97,  98  208;  Maya,  a  lyrical  drama  of, 

World  Federation,  182,  189  211 
World  War,  190  to  203 ;  outbreak 

in  Germany,  190  to  195  J  Wilson 

delays  preparation  for,  165 


LOAN  PERIOD 
HOME  USE 

4" 


u    DEpARTMENT 

Libran 


ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 

Renewals  and  Recharges  may  be  made  4  days  prior  to  the  due  date 

Books  may  be  Renewed  by  calling        642-3405 


DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 


FORM  NO.  DD6 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  BERKELEY 
BERKELEY,  CA  94720 


5135.1 

U.  C.  BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


502G. 

\ 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


